George Herring's short survey, What is the Oxford Movement? (2002) (rev. this Journal liv [2003], 383), broke new ground by including a chapter on the impact of Tractarianism in the parishes. With little written on this since his own Oxford D.Phil in 1984 its reappearance now in a substantially revised and expanded form is welcome. It provides a well-documented insight into the Tractarian parochial world during its first thirty years, though the sharp distinction that he makes between Tractarians and Ritualists, re-stated here, will not convince everyone.

An introduction sets out the Tractarian programme of promoting a new ‘via media’, free from Roman Catholic excess and evangelical ‘enthusiasm’, based on a new understanding of Tradition and the key principles of Reserve and Economy. For Newman, of course, this proved ultimately unsustainable, a ‘paper theory’, but in part i the author argues that many saw Newman's departure to Rome as an opportunity rather than a catastrophe. No longer unhealthily dependent on particular individuals, the movement was re-energised to ‘carry its message into the parishes of England unfettered by embarrassing neo-Roman baggage’(p. 26). In fact most clergy were not drawn into the movement through personal contact with the Oxford leaders at all, coming by various routes. Nor did conversions to Rome impede its progress.

Who were the Tractarian clergy? Chapter ii attempts a statistical survey using a methodology outlined at pp. 42–5 and lists them in a substantial appendix of 102 pages. A figure of just under 1,000 emerges which is then analysed in graphs and bar charts. By the 1860s this represented about 5 per cent of clergy, though this was an expanding minority found mostly in London, the Home Counties and the South-West. The author admits that this is a provisional figure and it is likely to be an underestimate, as the movement was never monolithic and no doubt there were varying degrees of commitment to it. None the less the list is useful tool and must have required considerable effort to compile. More detailed local studies may throw up more.

Part ii is the heart of the book. Here the author draws on a large body of sermons, diaries, letters, tracts and the surprising number of (nearly fifty) novels written by Tractarian clergy. In eight chapters he describes what was distinctive in Tractarian pastoral practice using Newman's Parochial and plain sermons of the 1830s as the theological template. These outlined a moderate and balanced pastoral programme devoid of either evangelical ‘excitement’ or ‘a false indulgence in sumptuousness‘(p. 78). Herring organises his material thematically, illustrating Tractarian understandings of priesthood and practice, church restoration and ceremonial, the daily service, the sacraments, confession and pastoralia with a host of local examples. He draws inevitably on well-known figures like Butler of Wantage, whose parochial diaries provide by far the best insight into parochial practice, Bennett of Frome, T. T. Carter of Clewer and Edward Munro of Harrow Weald, author of the influential ‘Parochial work’ which Keble hailed as ‘the best “Country parson” to appear in our times’. Curiously little is said about Keble's own parish, though interesting material is included on the less well-known Stevens of Bradfield. James Irvine, vicar of Leigh, Lancashire (the subject of a good study by Donald Gray), might have provided an example of a rare northern Tractarian at work. Change inevitably provoked opposition and the chapter on ‘Opponents’, episcopal and parochial, suitably rounds this section off.

In part iii, ‘The Mass in Masquerade’, Herring's discussion of ritualism shows that he has not softened his argument that from the 1860s onwards (and the 1860s are seen as the crucial decade) Ritualists were a different breed to the earlier Tractarians. He disputes the view which underlies Nigel Yates's major study Anglican ritualism in Victorian Britain, 1830–1910 (Oxford 1999) that Ritualism was the logical outcome of Tractarian sacramental teaching. Rather he sees a sharp discontinuity, believing that by eschewing the cautious moderation of their predecessors the Ritualists provoked disquiet even amongst Tractarians themselves and so sharpened conflict within the Church by their extremism. The result was a tragic de-railing of the original Tractarian programme in as much as the Ritualists settled for an essentially sectarian position in a Church where party warfare ultimately benefitted the very Liberals whom the Tractarians opposed. However his thematic treatment tends to obscure any chronological changes in clerical practice. Clergy might become more audacious as circumstances allowed. Tractarians like J. M. Neale and T. T. Carter were Ritualists at heart and Bennett himself was moving in that direction. Nor were all post-1860 Ritualists as militant as the crusading R. F. Littledale. While Ritualism certainly came to greater public attention in the 1860s the contrast made here between Tractarians and Ritualists is surely overdrawn.

How far did the Oxford Movement succeed in its aims? In the conclusion to this book the view is taken that by becoming simply one group within a comprehensive Establishment, Anglo-Catholicism effectively abandoned the original Tractarian aim of uniting the Church through its vision of a ‘via media’. Though ritual practices subsequently spread within the Church of England, in terms of catholic doctrine this was merely a victory of form over substance. The final pages of the conclusion relate this outcome to recent developments within the Church of England which Herring believes undermine the understanding of catholicity that the Tractarians sought to promote. However in an historical study this change of focus may be thought inappropriate. Perhaps it might have been better as a personal postscript.

Given that Tractarianism outside Oxford in the period to 1860 has been little studied Herring's book marks a significant contribution which will reach a wider audience than the thesis ever could. He has illuminated many aspects of Tractarianism on the ground and thus expanded our knowledge while providing a framework that will encourage further study especially of individual clergy, parishes and localities. His analysis, with its sharp distinction between Tractarians and Ritualists, and the 1860s as a crucial watershed, will doubtless continue to fuel debate.