PONTIFICAL ATHENEUM REGINA APOSTOLORUM

Faculty of Philosophy

The Relation Between Dogma and Freedom of

Enquiry in the University in John Henry Newman and

Alasdair MacIntyre

Director: Fr Alex Yeung, LC

Student: Br Ryan Carlin, LC

Matricola: 00009815

FILE1001 Elaboratum for First Cycle

Rome, April 28, 2014

2

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3

A. John Henry Newman’s historical context ....................................................... 4

B. Alasdair MacIntyre’s historical context .......................................................... 5

C. Newman and MacIntyre’s position in relief ................................................... 6

I. THE ROLE OF FREE THOUGHT IN LIBERAL UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

................................................................................................................................. 7

A. Newman’s conception of freedom of thought ................................................ 8

B. Newman’s conception of liberal education .................................................... 8

C. Newman’s conception of knowledge .............................................................. 9

D. Newman’s conception of the university ....................................................... 10

E. The role of free thought in the university ..................................................... 11

II. THE ROLE OF DOGMA AND THE MAGISTERIUM IN LIBERAL

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION WITH RESPECT TO FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

............................................................................................................................... 12

A. Newman’s conception of dogma .................................................................. 12

B. Newman’s conception of the Church’s Magisterium ................................... 13

C. The relation of free thought and Catholic dogma in general ........................ 13

D. The relation of freedom of thought and Catholic dogma in the university .. 14

III. THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FREEDOM

OF THOUGHT AND DOGMA IN LIBERAL UNIVERSITY EDUCATION ... 16

A. Freedom of thought and dogmatic truth in proper balance .......................... 16

B. Dogmatic truth curtailing freedom of thought .............................................. 17

C. Free thought cut off from dogmatic truth ..................................................... 18

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 21

3

INTRODUCTION

On January 15th

, 2008 Pope Benedict XVI was forced to decline a

speaking engagement at Rome’s Sapienza University on account of protests.

Despite general welcome on the part of the university a minority of professors and

students were unwilling to listen to the professor turned Pope offer them words of

encouragement as they began a new academic semester. However, the Holy

Father would not let their complaints silence him from speaking in defense of

Truth. He therefore published the full text of his planned address on the afternoon

of January 16th

in the Vatican’s “L’Osservatore Romano”. In the opening section

of the discourse Pope Benedict offers us a brief reflection on the proper

relationship between universities and the Catholic Church.

Of course, La Sapienza was once the university of the Pope. Today, however, it is

a secular university with that autonomy which, in keeping with the vision

inspiring their foundation, has always been part of the nature of universities,

which must be tied exclusively to the authority of the truth. It is in their freedom

from political and ecclesiastical authorities that the particular function of

universities lies – a function that serves modern society as well, which needs

institutions of this kind1.

It is this relationship of autonomy and authority with respect to the truth

that the then Holy Father mentions above which is to be the subject of our

discussion in this work. And as this is a rather broad field, allow me to narrow it

down even more, and define it as “The Relation between Dogma and Freedom of

Enquiry in the University”. In this work I would like to offer some reflections on

this essential, but historically rocky relationship from the point of view of a

seminarian studying in a university. As such I experience both sides of this

relation daily and it is my experience that that there is in fact no intrinsic conflict

between them, but rather a quite mutually beneficial relationship if we are willing

to work for it.

1 BENEDICT XVI, Lecture By The Holy Father Benedict XVI At The University Of Rome

"La Sapienza". The following is the Address that the Holy Father intended to give during

a Visit to La Sapienza University in Rome on Thursday, 17 January, in

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/january/documents/hf_be

n-xvi_spe_20080117_la-sapienza_en.html [30-3-2014].

4

In this work we will be taking as our guide the thought of John Henry

Newman which he expounded in 1852 in his series of lectures and pamphlets

offered to the Catholics of Ireland and now known as “The Idea of a University”.

While it has been over one hundred and fifty years since Newman voiced his

theories and the world of knowledge and of the university has definitely changed,

the perennial rational value of his theories justify us in re-proposing them to the

students and universities of today. In order to do so we will however need to draw

on the thought of a modern-day disciple of Newman in this field, Alasdair

MacIntyre, who personally acknowledges that his thought is deeply informed by

that of Newman2. Given the depth of their identification on the topic we will not

be citing any particular ideas peculiar to MacIntyre alone. Yet, it would not have

been possible to write this work without his help for we are deeply indebted to

him for our own understanding of Newman, through his very insightful analysis

of the former’s positions on our topic in his 2009 work “God, philosophy,

universities”. As such, while MacIntyre’s own words will not be quoted with

frequency and most of the time we will refer merely to what Newman thinks on

this or that point it is only possible to do so only in light of the influence

MacIntyre’s thought has had on our own.

In our discussion we will begin by first laying out briefly the historical

context for both Newman and MacIntyre’s thought on the subject, which is much

in keeping with their own methodology, in order to give the reader the proper

background for a true understanding of the subject. With this as a base we will

then lay out their developed thought in a succinct manner and proceed to explain

first those aspects pertaining to freedom of thought and secondly those that pertain

to dogma and its relation to freedom of thought within the university. Finally we

will wrap-up our reflections on the subject by drawing out a few examples of how

this relationship or lack thereof could play out in some sample university settings.

A. John Henry Newman’s historical context

2 In “Who’s Justice? Which Rationality?” [pages 353-354] MacIntyre states this

in reference to his thought on “traditions”. While he never explicitly acknowledges the

effect of Newman’s thought on his own in reference to our current topic the similarity of

their thought on this matter is so profound that we are lead to believe that MacIntyre

would also affirm Newman’s influence upon him in reference to our topic as well.

5

Let us lay out the historical context for our discussion beginning with John

Henry Newman. Newman was born in London in 1801 and received his

preliminary education at Great Ealing School in the same city before beginning

university studies at Oxford in 1816 where he would stay until 1843 as a student

and later professor. It was the educational environment of the Oxford of his day as

well as the ongoing debates in British intellectual circles regarding the value of

the liberal education that would lay the basis for his thought on universities and

their mission. During his time at Oxford he was educated broadly in the sciences

and came in contact with authors such as Hume and Locke. At the same time he

was also introduced to the works of Aristotle which had the deepest effect of all

upon him. It was during his Oxford days too that he became a fellow of Oriel

College and became friends with some of Britain’s shining lights in the field of

university education; Edward Copleston John Davison, and John Keble. His

continued studies however caused him to experience certain misgivings regarding

his Anglican faith which eventually led to his leaving Oxford in 1843 and his

reception into the Catholic Church in 1845. After this he studied for and was

ordained to the Catholic priesthood in Rome before returning to England in 1847

to help defend his now beloved faith in a country that was less than friendly to

Catholicism. During the next few years he became convinced of the need to

provide Catholics with a thorough education if they were ever to better their

position in English society and contribute to the progress of their nation.

Therefore when he received an invitation from the Primate of Ireland in 1852 to

give a series of lectures to the Catholics of Ireland in support of the founding of

the “Catholic University of Ireland” in response to the British governments

attempts to impose religion-free education on the Irish populace, he readily agreed

to the task. These lectures, which he delivered and then had published as

pamphlets between the months of May and October 1852, were then collected into

the work we now call “The Idea of a University”. This, as before mentioned, will

serve as the basis for our own discussions in this work3.

B. Alasdair MacIntyre’s historical context

3 cf. A. MACINTYRE, God, philosophy, universities. A Selective History of the Catholic

Philosophical Tradition, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers 2009, 131-150.

6

Alasdair MacIntyre is also a native of the British Isles, having been born in

Glasgow, Scotland in 1929. He pursued his higher studies first at Queen Mary

College, then at Manchester University, and finally at Oxford University before

beginning his teaching career in 1951. During the English chapter of his teaching

career he taught in the Universities of Leeds, Essex, and Oxford. He then moved

to the United States in 1969 and began the American chapter of his career at

Brandeis University outside Boston. This however was only the beginning of an

academic career which has brought him to teach in some capacity and for some

length of time in many of the leading universities in America; including Boston

University, Duke, Notre Dame, Princeton, Vanderbilt, and Yale. In the early

1980’s he converted to Catholicism through his acquaintance with St Thomas. He

has since become an authoritative voice in Catholic philosophical and theological

history in addition to his better known work in the fields of analytical philosophy

and ethics. He also has had an ongoing interest in the relation of faith and reason

as his broad experience in various universities, study of philosophical and

theological history, study of St Thomas, and reading of John Paul II’s “Fides et

Ratio” has brought him to recognize some serious challenges that need resolution

if the universities that he loves are to accomplish their mission in the world.

C. Newman and MacIntyre’s position in relief

Newman and MacIntyre’s position on the relationship between freedom of

thought and the dogmatic truths held in trust by the Roman Catholic Church’s

Magisterium is well summarized in the following quote taken from Newman’s

final discourse to the Catholics of Ireland.

Difficult then as the question may be, and much as it may try the judgments and

even divide the opinions of zealous and religious Catholics, I cannot feel any

doubt myself, Gentlemen, that the Church's true policy is not to aim at the

exclusion of Literature from Secular Schools, but at her own admission into them.

Let her do for Literature in one way what she does for Science in another; each

has its imperfection, and she has her remedy for each. She fears no knowledge,

but she purifies all; she represses no element of our nature, but cultivates the

whole [...] her principle is one and the same throughout: not to prohibit truth of

7

any kind, but to see that no doctrines pass under the name of Truth but those

which claim it rightfully4.

From this we can see that Newman’s essential position is one in which

freedom of thought and the dogmatic truths of the Catholic Church are united in

that they share the same object, Truth. As such there is not only no intrinsic

conflict between free thought and dogmatic truth, but there is rather a relationship

of mutual assistance between them that helps each to fulfill its particular end5.

Newman also takes steps at the beginning of his discourses to clarify that while he

could argue for this position from the perspective of faith he will curtail himself in

these lectures to proving his position based solely upon reason so that no one can

accuse him of “dogmatizing” the discussion6.

With this historical and theoretical context as a basis for our discussion we

will now proceed to discuss each of the two main aspects of this debate in depth.

Let us now begin by looking deeper at the dimension of freedom of thought and

its foundational role within liberal education and the university.

I. THE ROLE OF FREE THOUGHT IN LIBERAL

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

Both John Henry Newman and Alasdair MacIntyre were university

professors of note long before they became Catholic. As such their view on the

role of free thought in liberal university education predates their own acceptance

of the dogmatic truths professed in the Catholic Church and held in trust by her

Magisterium. In this chapter we shall seek to understand why Newman believes in

freedom of thought in the university by understanding what he holds freedom of

thought and the university each to be in their essence. This will also require us to

answer the questions of what liberal education and knowledge itself actually are.

With these four essential concepts, namely freedom of thought, the university,

4 J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of a University. Defined and Illustrated, Edited with an

Introduction and Notes by M. J. Svaglic, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame

1982, 177-178. 5 c.f. Ibid., 161-181.

6 c.f. Ibid., 1-14.

8

liberal education, and knowledge clarified we can then fully understand their

conception of free thought within the university setting. Let us now begin by

investigating what Newman understands by “freedom of thought”.

A. Newman’s conception of freedom of thought

For John Henry Newman “freedom of thought” is simply reason being

faithful to itself, reason faithfully pursuing the truth which is its object. This

carries with it two major implications. First, if man is to be faithful to his reason

this same reason must have received the proper training in discerning the truth

towards which it is directed or it will be incapable of free thinking and decisions.

Secondly, it also assumes that the person has free access to the entirety of truth in

the multitude of ways that it is revealed to us in the various disciplines of human

knowledge; for ignorance of any of them would in some way limit the scope of

one’s thought. This is not exactly what the majority of men think of today when

they claim the right to freedom of thought, but Newman’s understanding of the

term is in fact much more solidly founded than their own, which ultimately is

reducible to the license to hold whatever opinion suits one best in the current

moment without any reference to the truth that is revealed to us in the universe.

Since in our coming discussion of the relationship of freedom of thought and

dogma this conception of freedom of thought is so key we must now explain in

more detail each of these two implications7.

B. Newman’s conception of liberal education

In order for someone to be able to exercise true freedom of thought he

needs to have both a comprehensive understanding of the universe and proper

training in discovering the truth in the various situations of life. It is the specific

field of liberal education to provide formation in precisely these two areas. How

does it go about this task? First it teaches each of its subjects in a way that seeks

to determine the causes behind them and the relations between itself and all the

other subjects of study such that the student acquires a vision of the universe that

is just as unified as the universe itself. Second, it seeks to form within the student

7 c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-32.74-161.

9

not merely the capacity to memorize and regurgitate data acquired, but to analyze,

synthesize, and compare this data so as to comprehend the above mentioned

unified vision of the world and of particular facts within it. The final product of

this education is a man who has acquired knowledge of the various essential

disciplines of knowledge, but who has above all attained an intellectual culture

which has fit him to judge rightly in all the various situations of life, discerning

the causes and truths behind them, judging them in relation to the whole and

articulating his judgments to others. As such this liberal education is different

from all other types of education for while it does not teach us how to “produce”

anything it is the only type of knowledge that perfects the person as such. The

acquirement of facts increases what we know but it does not affect how we know.

Liberal education on the other hand forms the mind itself and makes us capable of

excellence in all of our future endeavors8. Newman puts it as follows:

When the intellect has once been properly trained and formed to have a connected

view or grasp of things, it will display its powers with more or less effect

according to its particular quality and capacity in the individual. In the case of

most men it makes itself felt in the good sense, sobriety of thought,

reasonableness, candour, self-command, and steadiness of view, which

characterize it. In some it will have developed habits of business, power of

influencing others, and sagacity. In others it will elicit the talent of philosophical

speculation, and lead the mind forward to eminence in this or that intellectual

department. In all it will be a faculty of entering with comparative ease into any

subject of thought, and of taking up with aptitude any science or profession9.

C. Newman’s conception of knowledge

In the two preceding paragraphs we have referred to the “entirety of truth”

and “the whole” and we must now explain these concepts that are integral to

Newman’s thought if we are to truly understand his notion of freedom of thought.

In his third discourse he tells us that:

Summing up, Gentlemen, what I have said, I lay it down that all knowledge forms

one whole, because its subject-matter is one; for the universe in its length and

breadth is so intimately knit together, that we cannot separate off portion from

portion, and operation from operation, except by a mental abstraction…10

8 c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-161.

9 Ibid., XLIII-XLIV.

10 Ibid., 38.

10

As Newman explains above he conceives of knowledge as one whole

which reflects the universe that is its object. Since it is such an immense

undertaking to truly comprehend such a vast reality, we as limited human beings

must study it piece by piece and from different angles; but we must never lose

sight of the unity of the universe that we are studying and the relations between

the various ways of looking at the it. To forget this unity would be the first step

towards a fragmented “knowledge” of the world. To lose the balance by ignorance

of one or another of the sciences that study the universe would leave us with gaps

in our knowledge that our mind will seek to fill with unfounded assumptions

based on the sciences with which we are familiar. This would over-extend the

given science, damaging it and giving us a skewed vision of reality. For example,

if a professor of nuclear physics were to try to develop an ethical system based on

his knowledge of nuclear fusion or if a professor of social ethics were to try to

explain the construction of a nuclear reactor on the basis of ethical principles.

Hence the importance for Newman of liberal education that teaches us the causes

and relations of the parts and not just the facts proper to each subject. He

highlights this many times throughout the discourses due to the tendency in the

academic institutions of his day – and of ours too – to isolate each discipline from

the others for the purpose of excellence in that discipline. While this is done with

the laudable intentions of excellence through division of labor it has the

unintended consequence of causing students and professors to lose the necessary

context surrounding their particular area of study in such a way that they actually

damage their very understanding of their topic11

.

D. Newman’s conception of the university

Finally, we need to discuss what Newman understands a university to be.

In the preface of “The Idea of the University” Newman defines his conception of

the university as “a place of teaching universal knowledge”12

. The clear

implication of this – as seen from the original emphasis in the text above – is that

the primary role of the university is to impart to its students the liberal education

11

c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-161. 12

Ibid., XXXVII.

11

we have discussed earlier in this chapter. This may seem to be obvious, but

Newman repeatedly returns to the importance of the university keeping focused

on this core principle since in his day there was great outside pressure to depart

from both teaching and universal knowledge within the university. Due to the fact

that a university education takes up so much time and money, Newman’s

contemporaries demanded that it should make due financial and productive

returns on these investments. They therefore pushed for an ever greater focus on

research, which took attention away from teaching, and for ever greater focus

upon the practical sciences to the detriment of liberal education in universal

knowledge. Newman however continued calling for the university to stay faithful

to its mission of teaching the truly universal knowledge on the grounds that only

such an education could truly produce men of intellectual culture truly capable of

making a difference in society13

.

E. The role of free thought in the university

It is in this light that Newman holds that freedom of thought is an essential

element in a university and that in fact the university is the optimal location for it

to take place. As earlier mentioned true freedom of thought implies both that we

have access to the whole of universal truth and the proper formation in how to

pursue it, in short a liberal education. It is Newman’s belief that the university

provides just such an environment in that here alone is it possible to bring together

in close quarters experts in every field of knowledge and students with the

innovation proper to their stage of life in an environment of disciplined study of

the whole of universal knowledge. Thus the university makes possible true

cultivation of freedom of thought. However, if the university were to be reduced

to education in the practical sciences we spoke of earlier it would sacrifice

freedom of thought in the process for to the degree that it removes liberal

education from its program of studies it also limits the capacity for freedom of

thought that it imparts to its students14

.

13

c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, XXXVII-XLVII.74-135. 14

c.f. Ibid., 1-14.74-161

12

At this point some of our readers may be a little disconcerted due to the

fact that such focus upon the essential role of freedom of thought in the university

seems at first glance to disparage dogmatic truth. However, this is not in fact the

case. If you will allow us a few more pages I believe that Newman, MacIntyre,

and I can prove to you that our position is in no way contrary to the Church’s

Magisterium.

II. THE ROLE OF DOGMA AND THE MAGISTERIUM IN

LIBERAL UNIVERSITY EDUCATION WITH RESPECT

TO FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

Newman’s own conversion to Catholicism is a fruit of his personal and

free pursuit of truths which he found to reside only in the Catholic Church. He

therefore in no way wishes to diminish the value of dogmatic truth by anything

that has been said thus far. In this chapter we will seek to show not only that he

does not diminish its value, but in fact gives it a splendor which in turn glorifies

freedom of thought as well. In order to properly understand this relation we need

to follow a similar dynamic to that which we used in the previous chapter by

identifying exactly what Newman understands dogma and the Catholic Church’s

Magisterium to be in their essence. We will then be able to properly demonstrate

Newman’s concept of the relation between freedom of thought and the dogmatic

truths held in care by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. As we already saw

briefly in the introduction of this work this relationship can be characterized as

one of mutual assistance in the pursuit of a single common end.

A. Newman’s conception of dogma

When Newman speaks of “Dogma” he is referring to specific truths of the

Catholic faith which the Church has received through divine revelation. These

truths are of a type wholly different from natural truths in that they find their

origin not in scientific proof but in the authority of the divine being who reveals

them to man. This may seem to be a dogmatic statement in itself which would beg

the question regarding our claim to argue in this work solely on rational grounds.

13

However, Newman and MacIntyre point out to us that any science ultimately is

based on a set of first principles which are improvable in the scientific sense of

the term, at least from within the science in question. The acceptance and use of

such first principles is common to all the sciences and makes their practice

possible. Thus any and all science begins from a certain act of faith in one’s first

principles which come from outside one’s own science. In the case of dogma we

are merely assuming the truth of divine revelation as our starting principle. While

some may demand that we justify this, we will likewise challenge them to prove

to us their first principles. If they can do so then we will concede. In the meantime

however, we will base ourselves on our first principles which in fact are partially

provable based on what we know of God through natural theology15

.

B. Newman’s conception of the Church’s Magisterium

When Newman speaks of the Church’s Magisterium he is referring to the

teaching body of the Catholic Church which defines and guards both the dogmatic

and non-dogmatic teachings of the Church. Since, as already mentioned, these

teachings are derived from divine truths received through the divine revelation

found in Sacred Scripture and the Tradition of the Church they must be treated in

a manner different from natural truths. As such, when the Magisterium of the

Church defines a dogmatic truth it is not seeking to discover a new truth or to

change the substance of what it has formerly taught, but rather to better grasp the

unlimited richness of divine revelation that has happened once for all and which is

in no way lacking16

.

C. The relation of free thought and Catholic dogma in general

It is in this light that Newman views the relation between freedom of

thought and the dogmatic truths watched over by the Magisterium of the Catholic

Church. Not only is there no intrinsic contradiction between the two, as modern

society would have us believe, but they should in fact be natural allies as they

share the same common object and goal of universal truth. Each one studies this

15

c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-53.161-181. 16

c.f. Ibid., 14-53.161-181.

14

truth in a different way and focuses on different aspects, but each is at the same

time an aid to the other in its respective handling of truth. Freedom of thought on

its part keeps dogma alive and fresh by providing it with new challenges to ponder

in light of revelation and by giving her intellectual tools with which to delve into

the mysteries of revelation. Dogma and the Churches Magisterium for their part

aid freedom of thought by opening up to it horizons it would never or only after

great effort reach of its own accord, and by calling it back when it strays from the

road of truth. They each pursue their respective aspect of truth with their own

proper method and tools. As such each must counter-balance the other to ensure

that neither tries to rule upon matters beyond its scope17

.

Nevertheless, an honest look at history tells us that most of the time the

relationship is not quite so smooth. This has caused some to try to sever the link

all together, but a healthier approach is to look at the challenges and ask ourselves

why they arise so that we can seek to remedy them. If we dig deeply enough we

can always find at the root of each conflict the departure from truth of one party or

the other by attempting to explain something beyond its proper scope. Thus

reconciliation of the two parties ultimately rests upon ensuring that students are

provided with an education which gives them access to the whole of universal

truth and teaches them the necessary skills to properly pursue it. This should

sound quite familiar to the reader as it is exactly the liberal education that

Newman holds to be the mission of the university.

D. The relation of freedom of thought and Catholic dogma in the university

This leads us to the core of our discussion, the relationship between

freedom of thought and the dogmatic truths held in trust by the Roman Catholic

Church’s Magisterium in the environment of the university. To begin let us look

at a text from the closing paragraphs of Newman’s fourth lecture on the

university.

I have argued in its behalf, first, from the consideration that, whereas it is the very

profession of a University to teach all sciences, on this account it cannot exclude

Theology without being untrue to its profession. Next, I have said that, all

17

c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-74.161-181.

15

sciences being connected together, and having bearings one on another, it is

impossible to teach them all thoroughly, unless they all are taken into account,

and Theology among them. Moreover, I have insisted on the important influence,

which Theology in matter of fact does and must exercise over a great variety of

sciences, completing and correcting them; so that, granting it to be a real science

occupied upon truth, it cannot be omitted without great prejudice to the teaching

of the rest. And lastly, I have urged that, supposing Theology be not taught, its

province will not simply be neglected, but will be actually usurped by other

sciences, which will teach, without warrant, conclusions of their own in a subject-

matter which needs its own proper principles for its due formation and

disposition18

.

Newman argues that if a university is to fulfill its goal of providing truly

universal knowledge to its students, it cannot in conscience deny Catholic

theology a place within the curriculum. By using the term “theology” Newman is

referring to the academic discipline which studies the truths about God and the

Catholic faith. Since this theology includes dogmatic truths and is watched over

by the Church’s Magisterium he also holds that in just the same way the Church

must be present in the university at least in such a degree as to see that its

theological truths are faithfully taught in their integrity, calling free thought back

to the truth when it strays. If the situation were ideal it would also be incorporated

into the whole program of education in such a way as to provide the students with

a universal knowledge of the causes and relations of things in light of God who is

their creator and source of their intelligibility. In so doing students would receive

the fullest possible picture of the universe, and truly limitless horizons for the

exploration of free thought19

.

The relationship between free thought and the dogmatic truths held in trust

by the Church’s Magisterium in Newman’s thought can therefore be characterized

in two ways. At the very minimum he envisions it as a relationship of virtuous

mean in which each does valuable service to the other while avoiding exceeding

its proper limits. Yet, if the situation were ideal he would envision it as a

relationship of transcendent unity in which these dogmatic truths and Catholic

theology in general would be an overarching reality within which free thought

18

J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 74. 19

c.f. Ibid., 14-74.161-181.

16

would do its work to the betterment of all in both the fields of divine and of

natural truth20

.

III. THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND DOGMA IN

LIBERAL UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

We have now come full circle in our discussion of the relationship

between freedom of thought and dogma within the university environment. In the

last chapter we sought to demonstrate that Newman’s high support for free

thought within the university in no way conflicts with his position of the necessity

for the Church’s dogmatic truths and her Magisterium to also be present in the

same university. In order to understand this properly we discussed what Newman

understands dogma, the Magisterium, and the relation between freedom of

thought and dogmatic truth in general to be and then sought to demonstrate the

pivotal role that this relationship plays within the university. Yet, our discussion

has so far been on a theoretical level and it may be hard for the reader to imagine

how these principles would actually play out in a real university setting. In order

to help resolve this we will in this chapter offer the example of three fictitious

universities which each exemplify one of the three ways that the relationship

between freedom of thought and dogma could play out in the university setting.

The first is Newman’s ideal university, St Phillip University, in which the proper

balance between freedom of thought and respect for the dogmatic truths held in

trust by the Magisterium has been achieved. The Second will be a university in

which the balance has been lost in favor of dogmatic truth, Fides University.

Finally there will be a university which has over exalted free thought, Progress

University.

A. Freedom of thought and dogmatic truth in proper balance

In St Phillip University we are met with an academic environment in

which students receive a comprehensive knowledge of all of the salutary academic

20

c.f. J.H. NEWMAN, The Idea of…, 14-74.161-181.

17

materials within an educational context which teaches them to use their free

thought to discern the truths of causes and relations of the things they are studying

in light of the ultimate cause of all for “understanding how things are is

inseparable from understanding them as informed by God’s purposes21

.” In this

light they are able to see the relative value of each particular piece of data they

receive in relation to the whole and due to their formation in analysis, synthesis

and comparison are able to integrate it into their system of values for application

in their life decisions. On this basis each is then enabled to pursue their particular

talents, be they towards in depth research of specialized scientific topics,

application in concrete professions, or simply to enable them to live fulfilling

social and personal lives; with a freedom of thought superior to their peers in

other institutions. This will prove a tough task at the outset as it will require major

modifications of both the content and method of university education in force

today. It will also prove difficult to find funding and students initially for it will

not produce immediately any sort of new ideas or novel research which usually

draws in both of these necessities. Yet if we are willing to be patient it will in the

long run gain for itself a fame superior to that of its competitors by launching into

the professional world persons of intellectual excellence and turning out scientific

research superior to that of the students of Fides and Progress Universities22

.

B. Dogmatic truth curtailing freedom of thought

In Fides University on the other hand the academic environment focuses

on training students in the memorization and explanation of those truths which it

is able to integrate within the sphere of its purely dogmatic vision. This will

require it to either close its mind to certain questions it cannot explain or

extrapolate answers for them based on what it has to work with which will be ever

less linked to the truth no matter how good the intentions. Either approach will be

a grave offence to truth itself and will do a disservice to the revealed truths it

seeks to protect. In the best situations this university will become irrelevant and

only do harm to the faith and intellect of a few, but if it gains any sort of notoriety

21

A. MACINTYRE, God, philosophy, universities…, 15. 22

c.f. Ibid., 15-18.173-180.

18

it will wound the credibility of the faith it claims to defend before the eyes of the

intellectually honest of the world who will be given grounds for their belief that

faith indeed cannot offer them answers in their search for Truth and in fact is a

dangerous obstacle to the development of free thought23

.

C. Free thought cut off from dogmatic truth

Progress University may arise as a sad effect of bad experiences in Fides

University or it may be a product merely of the secular time in which we live.

However, regardless of the cause the academic program of this university will

have as its central aims to provide absolute freedom of thought and high quality

education and research in highly specialized fields. This will make the university

very popular and affluent in a short span of time. The unintended consequences

however will be that due to a lack of unified and comprehensive vision of truth as

well as foundational intellectual skills students and teachers will slowly become

isolated within their particular specialization and will try to explain the whole of

universal truth from within their field. This will lead to the loss of true freedom of

thought for they will either take as their unifying principle merely one aspect of

reality and thus limit their ability to think to this portion of truth alone, or deny the

need for one altogether, resulting in a fragmented vision of reality. This will have

a correspondingly negative effect on the research the university turns out. For

while it will appear to be of the highest quality it will lack the outside verification

and contextualization a unified vision of universal truth would provide. This

university will surely continue in popularity and do service to mankind in

producing great practical advances, but it will ultimately fail in achieving

excellence, and will sacrifice the freedom of thought that it champions24

.

Based upon these three examples we can now see in broad strokes the

importance of maintaining the proper balance between freedom of thought and

dogma within the university as Newman advocates. While putting his theories into

action will be no small task the benefits that could be reaped from them are truly

worth the efforts that such changes will imply.

23

cf. A. MACINTYRE, God, philosophy, universities…, 15-18.173-180. 24

cf. Ibid., 15-18.173-180.

19

CONCLUSION

With this we arrive to the end of our discussion of the relationship between

dogma and freedom of thought in the university. We have taken as our guides two

professors whose search for truth, through the use of their God-given free thought,

led them to recognition of the fullness of the truth which resides in the Catholic

Church alone. Along this road we first discussed the historical context of each of

our authors and briefly laid out the condensed version of their thought on the

topic. We then proceeded to discuss in depth their understanding of freedom of

thought and its role within the university. From there we went on to study the role

of dogma and the Church’s Magisterium in relation to freedom of thought in the

university. Finally to help clarify any concepts that may have remained hard to

envision we offered the example of three fictitious universities that exemplify the

various ways in which the relationship of dogma and freedom of thought could

develop within the context of the university.

Based on our discussion I believe we are justified in holding firm to our

initial claim that dogma and freedom of thought should in no way be in conflict

within the university. What is more, I believe that we are now also justified in

claiming that for the university to fulfill its mission in the world, which all its

patrons, students, faculty, and staff truly desire, it must be an institution in which

true universal knowledge is freely and actively sought under the guidance of the

dogmatic truths held in trust by the Roman Catholic Church’s Magisterium and of

Catholic theology in general for they share the common object of Truth and

mission of imparting it to others which they can each only fully achieve when

they work together in harmony.

Allow me to conclude with another quote from Pope Benedict’s intended

address to the Sapienza University which characterizes well the ideal relationship

between dogma and free thought. One in which the Church does not merely seem

to nag free thought from behind reducing herself to keeping the other on track.

But rather one in which she inspires it to greater things from ahead:

Certainly, he [the pope] must not seek to impose the faith upon others in an

20

authoritarian manner – as faith can only be given in freedom. Over and above his

ministry as Shepherd of the Church, and on the basis of the intrinsic nature of this

pastoral ministry, it is the Pope’s task to safeguard sensibility to the truth; to

invite reason to set out ever anew in search of what is true and good, in search of

God; to urge reason, in the course of this search, to discern the illuminating lights

that have emerged during the history of the Christian faith, and thus to recognize

Jesus Christ as the Light that illumines history and helps us find the path towards

the future25

.

25

BENEDICT XVI, Lecture By The…, [30-3-2014].

21

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BENEDICT XVI, Lecture By The Holy Father Benedict XVI At The University Of

Rome "La Sapienza". The following is the Address that the Holy Father

intended to give during a Visit to La Sapienza University in Rome on

Thursday, 17 January, in

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/january/do

cuments/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080117_la-sapienza_en.html [30-3-2014].

MACINTYRE, A., God, philosophy, universities. A Selective History of the

Catholic Philosophical Tradition, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers,

Wiltshire 2009.

──────, Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, University of Notre Dame Press,

Notre Dame 2003.

NEWMAN, J.H., The Idea of a University. Defined and Illustrated, Edited with

an Introduction and Notes by M. J. Svaglic, University of Notre Dame

Press, Notre Dame 1982.