No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2022
In 1836, a new Roman Catholic periodical, The Dublin Review, was founded by Nicholas Wiseman, Michael Joseph Quin, and Daniel O'Connell. Though religion was only one aspect of its intended focus, the place and identity of Roman Catholicism in post-emancipation Britain was a major emphasis. Of particular focus was the Oxford Movement (1833–1845), otherwise known as Tractarianism. Wiseman, then rector of the English College, Rome, had paid close attention to the Oxford Movement since 1833 and, via the Dublin Review, would critically engage with Tractarian literature and ideas. This paper examines this engagement from 1836 to 1845, discussing Wiseman's polemical responses to the Oxford Movement. Paying attention to the pre-history of the Dublin Review, its importance as a periodical, and its significant influence upon a handful of the leading Tractarians, especially John Henry Newman, Wiseman emerges as an influential polemicist and apologist. Respectful of Tractarian learning and zeal, Wiseman was nonetheless unambiguous in his criticisms of Tractarian ecclesiology—relentless especially in his promotion of the view that the leaders of the Oxford Movement should convert to Roman Catholicism. By 1840, the year Wiseman arrived in England as a bishop, the Dublin Review had significantly dented Newman's confidence in the Tractarian project. Wiseman, the future Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, had, by means of the Dublin Review, made Roman Catholic views on Tractarianism known, heard, and felt in Oxford and Britain. In the case of John Henry Newman, who became a Roman Catholic in 1845, Wiseman could claim a significant victory.
1 Much of which builds upon Peter B. Nockles defining study: The Oxford Movement in Context: Anglican High Churchmanship 1760–1857 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). See also Brown, Stewart J. and Nockles, Peter B., eds, The Oxford Movement: Europe and the Wider World 1830–1930 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Morris, Jeremy, The High Church Revival in the Church of England: Arguments and Identities (Leiden: Brill, 2016)Google Scholar; Herring, George, The Oxford Movement in Practice: The Tractarian Parochial World from the 1830s to the 1870s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brown, Stewart J., Nockles, Peter B., and Pereiro, James, eds, The Oxford Handbook of the Oxford Movement (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aquino, Frederick D. and King, Benjamin J., eds, The Oxford Handbook of John Henry Newman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Shea, C. Michael, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy 1845–1854 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 Of primary significance is a sermon Wiseman preached on October 9, 1839, at St Mary's Catholic Church, Derby, wherein Wiseman outlined a theory that, as Shea puts it, bares “remarkable affinities to Newman's theory of doctrinal development” (Shea, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy, 52). See Nicholas Wiseman, A Sermon Preached at the Opening of St Mary's Catholic Church, in Derby, October 9 MDCCCXXXIX (Derby: James Storer, 1839). See also Wilfrid Ward, The Life and Times of Cardinal Wiseman, 2 vols. (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1897), 1:314–319.
4 Shea, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy, 33–34.
5 Colin Barr, Ireland's Empire: The Roman Catholic Church in the English-Speaking World, 1829–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 13–14.
6 Shea, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy, 35.
7 Shea, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy, 35–36.
8 Shea, Newman's Early Roman Catholic Legacy, 37.
9 See Niccola Wiseman, Dissertazione sullo stato attuale del Protestantesimo in Inghilterra (Roma: Nella Tipografia Salviucci, 1837); Annali Delle Scienze Religiose, September–October 1837, 61–90.
10 See Charles T. Dougherty and Homer C. Welsh, “Wiseman on the Oxford Movement: An Early Report to the Vatican,” Victorian Studies 2, no. 2 (1958), 149–154, and Richard J. Schiefen, “The English Catholic Reaction to the Tractarian Movement,” Study Sessions 41 (1974), 9–31.
11 Bernard Ward, The Sequel to Catholic Emancipation, 2 vols. (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1915), 1:65–81.
12 See Nicholas Wiseman, Lectures on the Principal Doctrines and Practices of the Catholic Church (London: Joseph Booker, 1836).
13 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:230–244.
14 John Henry Newman to Henry Edward Manning, September 5, 1836, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 5, ed. Thomas Gornall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), 349.
15 See John Keble, National Apostasy Considered in a Sermon Preached in St. Mary's Oxford, before His Majesty's Judges of Assize, on Sunday, July 14, 1833 (Oxford: J. H. Parker, 1833).
16 W. J. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Correspondence of Daniel O'Connell: The Liberator, 2 vols. (New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1888), 1:180–181.
17 Robert M. Andrews, “High Church Anglicanism in the Nineteenth Century,” in The Oxford History of Anglicanism, Vol. III: Partisan Anglicanism and its Global Expansion, 1829–c.1914, ed. Rowan Strong (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 145–148.
18 From the beginning, Newman complained about Wiseman's association with O'Connell. See, for example, Newman to John William Bowden, August 3, 1835, in Letters and Diaries, 5:114.
19 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:292.
20 On the history of the Dublin Review, see Paul Alexander Richardson, “Serial Struggles: English Catholics and their Periodicals, 1648–1844” (PhD thesis, Durham University, 2003), 201–254; L. C. Casartelli, “Our Diamond Jubilee,” The Dublin Review, April 1896, 245–271; Walter E. Houghton et al., eds, The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals 1824–1900, vol. 2 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), 9–180; Josef L. Altholz, The Religious Press in Britain, 1760–1900 (New York: Greenwood, 1989), 99–100 and Mary Anthony Weinig, “The Dublin Review,” in British Literary Magazines: The Romantic Age, 1789–1836, ed. Alvin Sullivan (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1983), 114–119.
21 Edward Norman, Roman Catholicism in England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 57–58.
22 Casartelli, “Our Diamond Jubilee,” 252.
23 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 225.
24 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:415, 419.
25 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 224–235.
26 Elizabeth Tilley, The Periodical Press in Nineteenth-Century Ireland (Cham: Palgrave MacMillan, 2020), 105.
27 Notably the various publications of William Eusebius Andrews—such as the Orthodox Journal, founded in 1813, which ran intermittently for the next two decades—and the Catholic Magazine (1831–36) of the Rev. T. M. McDonnell. See Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 5–6, 90–200; Altholz, The Religious Press in Britain, 97–99.
28 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 242–244; Schiefen, “English Catholic Reaction,” 21.
29 Edward Norman, The English Catholic Church in the Nineteenth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), 15–20.
30 Schiefen, Nicholas Wiseman, 68.
31 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 201–202, 209–211. Though Quin did continue to write for the Dublin Review.
32 Schiefen, Nicholas Wiseman, 69–70.
33 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 211, 224–225; Houghton et al., eds., The Wellesley Index, 2:10, 17.
34 This was a specific role that Wiseman undertook in consultation with the editor (Bagshawe) and an advisory council. See Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 213.
35 Dublin Review, May 1836, i.
36 Richardson, “Serial Struggles,” 234.
37 Ward, Sequel, 1:203–219; Pauline Adams, English Catholic Converts and the Oxford Movement in Mid-19th Century Britain: The Cost of Conversion (Palo Alto: Academica, 2010), 9–27.
38 The Dublin Review, July 1837, 78–79.
39 Newman to Thomas Dyke Acland, April 27, 1836, in Letters and Diaries, 5:290.
40 James Garrard, Archbishop Howley, 1828–1848 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2015), 70.
41 Garrard, Archbishop Howley, 71–73.
42 [John Henry Newman], Elucidations of Dr. Hampden's Theological Statements (Oxford: J. H. Parker, 1836).
43 [Edward Bouverie Pusey], Dr. Hampden's Theological Statements and the Thirty-Nine Articles Compared (Oxford: J. H. Parker, 1836).
44 See [Renn Dickson Hampden], A Letter to His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, Explanatory of the Proceedings at Oxford, on the Appointment of the Present Regius Professor of Divinity (London: B. Fellowes, 1836).
45 Mark D. Chapman, “Liberal Anglicanism,” in The Oxford History of Anglicanism, Vol. III, 216; Peter B. Nockles, “Conflicts in Oxford,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Oxford Movement, 130.
46 “The Oxford Malignants and Dr Hampden,” Edinburgh Review, April 1836, 225–39; “Dr. Hampden and the University of Oxford,” British Critic, April 1836, 482–491.
47 The Dublin Review, May 1836, 250.
48 The Dublin Review, May 1836, 250–251.
49 The Dublin Review, May 1836, 254. This quote from Hampden's Letter to His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, originally came from the “Report of the Corpus Committee” (March 10, 1836), in which Hampden's Tractarian and High Church critics had attempted to get University Convocation to pass a censure against him. See “Report of the Corpus Committee,” in Letters and Diaries, 5:264–265.
50 The Dublin Review, May 1836, 264.
51 See “The High Church Theory of Dogmatical Authority,” Dublin Review, July 1837, 43–79. See John Keble, Primitive Tradition Recognised in Holy Scripture (London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1837) and [John Henry Newman], “Dr. Wiseman's Lectures on the Catholic Church,” British Critic, October 1836, 373–403.
52 Dublin Review, July 1837, 46.
53 Dublin Review, July 1837, 46.
54 Dublin Review, July 1837, 56–57.
55 Dublin Review, July 1837, 46.
56 See James Endell Tyler to Newman, March 3, 1836, and Newman's reply on March 5, in Letters and Diaries, 5:252.
57 See Letters and Diaries, 5:110, 271, 318–320.
58 See Tracts for the Times by Members of the University of Oxford. Vol. III for 1833–36 (London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1836), 71:1–35.
59 Tracts for the Times . . . Vol. III, 71:1. See also Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:233–235.
60 See the British Critic, October 1836, 376.
61 See John Henry Newman, Lectures on the Prophetical Office of the Church, Viewed Relatively to Romanism and Popular Protestantism (London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1837).
62 Newman to Manning, September 5, 1836, in Letters and Diaries, 5:349.
63 Newman to Manning, September 5, 1836, in Letters and Diaries, 5:349.
64 British Critic, October 1836, 376.
65 See Newman to John Keble, August 27, 1837; Newman to Frederic Rogers, August 31, 1837; Newman to Keble, May 7, 1838, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 6, ed. Gerard Tracey (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 119, 120–121, 239.
66 Newman to Keble, May 7, 1838, in Letters and Diaries, 6:239.
67 See the Dublin Review, July 1837, 62; Dublin Review, October 1838, 287; Dublin Review, August 1839, 141.
68 See the motto appearing on the cover of the published Tracts for the Times: “If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle” (1 Cor. 14:8 Authorized Version).
69 Tracts for the Times . . . Vol. III for 1836–36, 71:2–3.
70 Tracts for the Times . . . Vol. III for 1836–36, 71:3.
71 Keble (8), Pusey (7) and John William Bowden (5), were the next most prolific authors of the Tracts. See Frank M. Turner, John Henry Newman: The Challenge of Evangelical Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 165.
72 Turner, John Henry Newman, 167.
73 See “Tracts for the Times,” Dublin Review, April 1838, 307–335; “Anglican Claims of Apostolical Succession [Part I],” Dublin Review, October 1838, 287–309; “Anglican Claims of Apostolical Succession [Part II],” Dublin Review, August 1839, 139–180.
74 Schiefen, “English Catholic Reaction,” 20–24.
75 Dublin Review, April 1838, 307–308. See also the conclusion, 334–335.
76 Dublin Review, April 1838, 308.
77 Citing the Vulgate, Wiseman does not give an English translation. The translation cited here is from the Douay–Rheims.
78 Dublin Review, April 1838, 308.
79 Dublin Review, April 1838, 312, 313, 325.
80 Wiseman failed to appreciate that the Book of Common Prayer did actually preserve a truncated version of the daily offices.
81 Dublin Review, April 1838, 313–325.
82 See F. C. Mather, “Georgian Churchmanship Reconsidered: Some Variations in Anglican Public Worship 1714–1830,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 36, no. 2 (1985): 255–283.
83 Dublin Review, April 1838, 327.
84 Dublin Review, April 1838, 333–334.
85 Dublin Review, April 1838, 329–330.
86 Dublin Review, April 1838, 308.
87 Isaiah 34:11. Wiseman quoted from the Authorised Version, which he referred to as the “Prot. vers.” See the Dublin Review, April 1838, 334.
88 Dublin Review, April 1838, 333–334.
89 Wiseman did nonetheless state that he denied their validity. See the Dublin Review, October 1838, 286–287, 296.
90 Dublin Review, October 1838, 287.
91 Dublin Review, October 1838, 287; see Tracts for the Times by Members of the University of Oxford. Vol. I. for 1833–4 (London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1834), 7:1–4.
92 William Barlow (d.1568), successive Bishop of St David's, Bath and Wells, and Chichester, was one of four bishops who consecrated Matthew Parker (1504–1575) to the See of Canterbury in 1559. Roman Catholics debated whether Parker was validly consecrated owing to the fact that the bishops who consecrated him—including Barlow—had used the service of consecration from the Second Edwardian Prayer Book of 1552.
93 A reference to the Meletian (or Melitian) Schism associated with Meletius (or Melitius), bishop of Lycopolis, who in c.306 accused Bishop Peter of Alexandria of being too lenient on those who had lapsed during the Diocletianic persecution. Meletius had consequently conducted ordination without the consent of Alexandria or the broader Church. These consecrations, according to Wiseman, were valid but schismatic and, therefore, without jurisdiction or proper authority. See the Dublin Review, October 1838, 288–290.
94 Dublin Review, October 1838, 289–290.
95 Dublin Review, October 1838, 306.
96 Dublin Review, August 1839, 145–146.
97 Dublin Review, August 1839, 150–152.
98 Dublin Review, August 1839, 156–169.
99 Dublin Review, August 1839, 141.
100 Dublin Review, August 1839, 143.
101 For example, Wiseman compared Optatus's (fl.370) use of the Donatist woman, Lucilla (whom Optatus blamed for beginning the Donatist schism), to Anne Boleyn—“who,” as Wiseman put it, “seeing that the discipline of the Church would not admit her impious designs brought about as the first cause the king's awful separation” (Dublin Review, August 1839, 144). Regarding Optatus's polemical use of Lucilla, see Jennifer Eyl, “Optatus's Account of Lucilla in Against the Donatists, or, Women Are Good to Undermine With,” in A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer, eds. Susan Ashbrook Harvey et al. (Providence, RI: Brown Judaic Studies, 2015), 155–163.
102 Dublin Review, August 1839, 143.
103 Dublin Review, August 1839, 154.
104 Dublin Review, August 1839, 154.
105 See Newman's account in the Apologia: “For a mere sentence, the words of St. Augustine, struck me with a power which I never had felt from any words before. To take a familiar instance, they were like the ‘Turn again Whittington’ of the chime; or, to take a more serious one, they were like the ‘Tolle, lege,—Tolle, lege,’ of the child, which converted St. Augustine himself. ‘Securus judicat orbis terrarum!’ By those great words of the ancient Father, interpreting and summing up the long and varied course of ecclesiastical history, the theory of the Via Media was absolutely pulverized.” See John Henry Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Six Sermons, ed. Frank M. Turner (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 228–229. This was not embellishment based on hindsight—see Gerard Tracey, ed., The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 7 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 154, 156–157, 166–167, 177–178, 187, 202, 214, 218–119, 226, 241.
106 That year Newman had been troubled by a belief that Anglicanism might be paralleled as being similar to the churches that dissented from Council of Chalcedon (451). See Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Six Sermons, 225–127.
107 Curavimus Babylonem et non est curata is a reference to Jeremiah 51:9, which the Vulgate translates as Curavimus Babylonem et non est sanata (emphasis added). This was the verse—and translation—invoked by Wiseman in April 1838. Though Newman used a slightly different iteration, the possible reference to Wiseman's April 1838 use of Jeremiah 51:9 is striking and may indicate that Jeremiah 51:9—“an awkward omen”—had been impressed upon Newman previously from the Dublin Review. A few years later, in a letter to George Ryder on 15 April 1841, Newman again made reference to Jeremiah 51:9: “I suppose we must wait a while—but as to anyone patching up the Reformers, it is impossible. Sanavimus Babylonem, et not sanata est.” See Newman to Ryder, April 15, 1841, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 8, ed. Gerard Tracey (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), 176.
108 Newman to Frederic Rogers, September 22, 1839, in Letters and Diaries, 7:154.
109 Most vividly to Henry Wilberforce in early October 1839. See The Dublin Review, April 1869, 327–328.
110 Manning to Newman, September 17, 1839, in Letters and Diaries, 7:153.
111 Newman to Rogers, September 22, 1839; Samuel Francis Wood to Newman, October 29, 1839; Newman to Wood, November 10, 1839; Wood to Newman, July 13, 1840; Newman to Robert Williams, July 19, 1840; Wood to Newman, July 20, 1840. See Letters and Diaries, 7:154–155, 179–181, 355, 363–364.
112 See “Catholicity of the English Church,” British Critic, January 1840, 40–88.
113 Newman to Bowden, January 5, 1840, in Letters and Diaries 7:202.
114 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:377–379, 381, 387; Ward, Sequel, 1:164–167, 210–219.
115 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:387; Schiefen, “English Catholic Response,” 26–27.
116 Nicholas Wiseman, A Letter on Catholic Unity, Addressed to the Right Hon. The Earl of Shrewsbury (London: Charles Dolman, 1841), 13–14.
117 Tract 90 would subsequently appear in two further revisions—the second in June 1841 and the third in December 1841. Wiseman commentary on Tract 90 in the Dublin Review would appear in August 1841. It is possible Wiseman used either the first or second edition.
118 [John Henry Newman], Tracts for the Times, No. 90. Remarks on Certain Passages in the Thirty-Nine Articles, 2nd edn. (London: J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1841), 80.
119 Michael J. G. Pahls and Kenneth L. Parker, “Tract 90: Newman's Last Stand or a Bold New Venture?,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Oxford Movement, 305.
120 Pahls and Parker, “Tract 90,” 308–309.
121 See [John Henry Newman], A Letter Addressed to the Rev. R.W. Jelf, D.D., Canon of Christ Church in Explanation of No. 90, in the Series Called “The Tracts for the Times” (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1841), 28–29.
122 See Nicholas Wiseman, A Letter Respectfully Addressed to the Rev. J. H. Newman upon some passages in his Letter to the Rev. Dr. Jelf (London: Charles Dolman, 1841).
123 For reference, see above, n116.
124 William Palmer, A Letter to N. Wiseman, D.D. . . . Containing Remarks on his Letter to Newman (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1841), 3. See also, William Palmer, Letters to N. Wiseman, D.D. On the Errors of Romanism (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1842).
125 See letters dated April 3, 4, and 6, 1841, in Letters and Diaries, 8:153, 154, 160–161.
126 The meeting's conduct and tone were formal and guarded. As Newman wrote to Pusey: “Dr. Wiseman . . . called on me and stopped an hour—we did not talk on any religious subject” (Newman to Pusey, July 23, 1841, Letters and Diaries, 8:228–229).
127 See Ambrose Lisle Phillipps, Some Remarks on a Letter Addressed to the Reverend R. W. Jelf, D.D. . . . in Explanation of No. 90 (London: Charles Dolman, 1841); [“An English Catholic”], Oxford or Rome? A Letter to the Rev. J. H. Newman on Tract No. 90 (London: James Ridgway, 1841); [“A Catholic Priest”], Remarks on Tract 90, Francis À Sancta Clara, Newman, Sibthorp, Wiseman, Palmer (London: Longman & Co., 1843).
128 See Newman, “To the Editor of the Times,” in Letters and Diaries, 8:314–316.
129 See Rowan Strong, “The Oxford Movement and the British Empire: Newman, Manning and the Jerusalem Bishopric,” in The Oxford Movement: Europe and the Wider World 1830–1930, 78–98.
130 Nockles, Oxford Movement in Context, 157–164.
131 “The Catholic and Anglican Churches,” Dublin Review, August 1841, 240–263.
132 Dublin Review, August 1841, 241.
133 Dublin Review, August 1841, 241–242.
134 Dublin Review, August 1841, 242.
135 Dublin Review, August 1841, 243.
136 Dublin Review, August 1841, 246.
137 Dublin Review, August 1841, 252.
138 Dublin Review, August 1841, 252.
139 Dublin Review, August 1841, 252.
140 Dublin Review, August 1841, 252.
141 “The Anglican System,” Dublin Review, February 1842, 221–249; “Protestantism of the Anglican Church,” Dublin Review, May 1842, 525–555.
142 Dublin Review, February 1842, 229.
143 Michael John Trott, “A simple, rare, truly elect soul – the troubled life of Richard Waldo Sibthorp, 1792–1879” (PhD thesis, University of Hull, 2003), 209–212.
144 See Richard Waldo Sibthorp, Some Answer to the Enquiry; Why Are You Become a Catholic? (London: Charles Dolman, 1842).
145 Dublin Review, February 1842, 229.
146 Dublin Review, February 1842, 229.
147 Dublin Review, February 1842, 225–243, 249; Dublin Review, May 1842, 526–527, 529–534.
148 Dublin Review, February 1842, 229–230.
149 Dublin Review, February 1842, 241–243; Dublin Review, May 1842, 545–547.
150 Dublin Review, February 1842, 222–223.
151 Newman to Keble, May 24, 1842, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 9, eds. Francis J. McGrath and Gerard Tracey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 14–15.
152 Newman to Wiseman (draft, not sent), October 5, 1841, in Letters and Diaries, 8:282–285.
153 Newman to Wiseman (draft, not sent), October 5, 1841, in Letters and Diaries, 8:283 (emphasis in original). Newman drafted another unsent letter dated October 14, 1841. See Letters and Diaries, 8:297–298.
154 By early 1842, Wiseman was thirty-nine years of age, Newman forty-one.
155 See in particular Newman's letter to Robert Isaac Wilberforce, January 26, 1842, in Letters and Diaries, 8:440–442.
156 See Ambrose Macaulay, Dr Russell of Maynooth (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1983), 65–98; Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Six Sermons, 287–289.
157 Russell is identified as the author of over forty contributions to the Dublin Review from 1836 to 1845. See Houghton et al., eds, The Wellesley Index, 2:22–47.
158 Macaulay, Dr Russell of Maynooth, 74–75.
159 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:389–391.
160 Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Six Sermons, 287–288.
161 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:423–429.
162 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:417.
163 Dublin Review, August 1843, 110.
164 See John Henry Newman, Sermons, Chiefly on the Theory of Religious Belief (London: J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1843) and Sermons, on Subjects of the Day (London: J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1843).
165 Dublin Review, August 1843, 112–114; Dublin Review, December 1843, 547–557.
166 Dublin Review, August 1843, 114; Dublin Review, December 1843, 557.
167 Bernard Smith (December 1842); William Lockhart (August 1843); William George Ward (September 1845).
168 Dublin Review, December 1843, 547–548.
169 Newman to Wiseman, April 16, 1845, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, vol. 10, ed. Francis J. McGrath (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 626.
170 Newman to Wiseman, April 16, 1845, Letters and Diaries, 10:626.
171 Newman to Wiseman, April 16, 1845, Letters and Diaries, 10:627.
172 Newman to Ambrose St John, April 17, 1845, Letters and Diaries, 10:627–628.
173 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:429–430.
174 Ward, Cardinal Wiseman, 1:433.
175 “The Religious Movement,” Dublin Review, December 1845, 522–539. See Newman, John Henry, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (London: James Toovey, 1845)Google Scholar; Oakeley, Frederick, A Letter, On Submitting to the Catholic Church (London: James Toovey, 1845)Google Scholar; Marshall, Thomas William, Twenty-Two Reasons for Entering the Catholic Church (London: Thomas Richardson & Son, 1845)Google Scholar.
176 Dublin Review, December 1845, 522.
177 Dublin Review, December 1845, 538–539.
178 Dublin Review, December 1845, 539.
179 Dublin Review, December 1845, 539.
180 Dublin Review, December 1845, 522, 539, 543–545.
181 Dublin Review, December 1845, 544.
182 Herring, Oxford Movement in Practice, 23–40.
183 Dublin Review, December 1845, 545.
184 Dublin Review, August 1843, 108–110.
185 Eclectic Review, September 1839, 249.
186 Eclectic Review, September 1839, 241, 246, 249–253, 260–261.
187 Wiseman, Essays, 2:vii.
188 Dublin Review, August 1843, 111; Wiseman, Essays, 2:vii.
189 Adams, English Catholic Converts and the Oxford Movement, 9–27.
190 Newman, John Henry, Discourses Addressed to Mixed Congregations (London: Longman, Brown, Green & Longmans, 1849), viGoogle Scholar.
191 Dublin Review, May 1839, 429.