What could be helpful at the present
juncture would be
a National Catholic Accrediting Association.

The future
of the Catholic university

By Terry J. Tekippe

n This inquiry is an attempt to discern the future of the Catholic university in the United States during the 21st century. What will Catholic universities be like in 50 or 100 years? Will they still be solidly Catholic? Or will they have lost that distinctiveness, remaining perhaps Catholic in name only, or by a vague reference to their institutional history?

The question is not a purely speculative one, as a number of serious historical studies have now been done on our outstanding secular universities, most of which were founded under Protestant inspiration. In The Soul of the American University, George Marsden examines especially the evolution of Yale, Harvard, Princeton, among others. His conclusion is clear from the subtitle: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief. James Burtchaell presented a similar study of Vanderbilt University in the pages of First Things.1

In both studies, it becomes clear that the shift from religious to secular ideals and allegiances was not made by any individual or group deliberately out to secularize the university, or undermine its religious character. No, in the usual case it was religious leaders themselves, each slightly more progressive than the last, each trying sincerely to adjust to the most enlightened views of his time, who gradually alienated the university, first from church control, then from allegiance to any particular Christian theology, then from any Christian commitments at all. The moral of these stories seems to be that American culture bears within itself a strong current of secularization, which gradually but inexorably prevailed over all the religious commitments of the university founders.

These histories of our major universities point up more precisely and urgently the opening question: Are our Catholic universities, as they have moved into the American mainstream after Vatican II, also destined to be swept away by the same secular current? Will they slip down the same greased slides as their Protestant forerunners? Or is there something different about the Catholic university that will allow it to escape the same fate?

An answer ventured

In attempting to answer this question about an imponderable future, I will offer a model of the Catholic university based on Pope John Paul II's Ex Corde Ecclesiae, and then show that many of our Catholic universities may be operating from a quite different model.

The Catholic university is, first of all, "Catholic": that is, it sees itself as part of an international Church, indeed as integrally involved in a worldwide evangelical and missionary endeavor. That is reflected in the opening words of the Constitution, "Born from the heart of the Church . . ." (1). The whole Church is invited to support these Catholic institutions of higher learning, essential for the growth of the Church and human progress (11). In its turn, "Every Catholic university, without ceasing to be a university, has a relationship to the Church that is essential to its institutional identity" (27).

The mission of the Catholic university, indeed of all higher institutions of Catholic learning, is to be "engaged in instilling the Gospel message of Christ in souls and cultures" (10). More specifically, "By its very nature, each Catholic university makes an important contribution to the church's work of evangelization" (49).

Second, the Catholic university is committed to the truth of a revelation granted by God the Father at a specific place and time, in the events of the Incarnation, the Death and Resurrection of Jesus the Christ, and the sending of the Holy Spirit. John Paul makes clear that the Catholic university is devoted to the total truth about man that includes revelation and reason.

Catholic universities . . . are called to explore courageously the riches of revelation and of nature so that the united endeavors of intelligence and of faith will enable people to come to the full measure of their humanity, created in the image and likeness of God, renewed even more marvelously after sin in Christ and called to shine forth in the light of the Spirit (5).

Finally, the Catholic university envisions itself in terms of authority and obedience. In his final appearance in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus claims all authority in heaven and on earth (28:18); and sends out his apostles with the assurance, "He who hears you, hears me" (Luke 10:16). Yet he himself became obedient unto death, and learned obedience through what he suffered (Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8). The Christian, then, is one who responds to God's revelation with "the obedience of faith." This context of authority and obedience is quite clear in Ex Corde Ecclesiae.

. . . because it is an academic institution and therefore a part of the international community of scholarship and inquiry, each institution participates in and contributes to the life and mission of the universal church, assuming consequently a special bond with the Holy See by reason of the service to unity which it is called to render to the whole church. One consequence of its essential relationship to the church is that the institutional fidelity of the university to the Christian message includes a recognition of and adherence to the teaching authority of the church in matters of faith and morals (27).

Quite a different model is followed in our secular universities, including those which were originally religious in founding and orientation. There the key word is "freedom," as can be found in the brief but suggestive 1940 statement of the American Association of University Professors. It holds that the common good is best served by the freedom of searching for and expressing truth. Religious restrictions on that unlimited freedom are allowed by way of exception. In a later statement of 1968, with the general agreement of universities, including religious ones, this exception was dropped as no longer necessary.2

It was in response to Ex Corde Ecclesiae that the two largest societies of Catholic theologians, the Catholic Theological Society of America, and the College Theology Society, each issued a statement on the institutional commitments of the Catholic university. Examination of the CTS statement will show that it corresponds more to the secular, Enlightenment model than to the Catholic one. Where Ex Corde Ecclesiae envisions the Catholic university as part of a worldwide Church, the CTS statement focuses more on the American context: "This uniquely American autonomy is also one of the conditions for the flourishing of our institutions and for the general recognition by the larger American society of their excellence as institutions of higher learning with a Catholic character . . . ." The statement appears aggressively to separate the Catholic college or university from any connection or responsibility to the larger Church. "Given their standing in civil law, it is uniquely the responsibility of the colleges and universities to maintain their Catholic character and mission." Again, "Nevertheless, the college or university alone must undertake any self-study and must not be required to report to an external ecclesiastical authority."3

The CTS statement, secondly, does not explicitly reject revelation as a standard. But it does see Catholic doctrine as threatening. "It is appropriate for Catholic universities to 'freely commit themselves to the Christian message,' but to limit it to coming through the Catholic Church is problematic."4

Finally, the statement says little about authority and obedience; rather it has a very strong stress on the Enlightenment theme of autonomy, with an explicit rejection of any, including ecclesial, outside control:

But recognition of their Catholic character includes as well appreciation of the fact that our institutions must possess the autonomy necessary to develop their distinctive identities and pursue their proper missions . . . .

Most Catholic colleges and universities are established in civil law as private, free-standing corporations and are not legally accountable to ecclesiastical authorities . . . .

In U.S. colleges and universities, Catholic faculty members in theology departments in accredited colleges and universities along with their colleagues in other departments have the right to academic freedom as well as the responsibility to participate in curriculum development and in the internal governance of the university. It is the duty of the administration to protect these rights and responsibilities from external interference.5

Dr. William Shea of the theology department of St. Louis University has also written on this subject. He proposes a model that appears, at first sight, to try to combine the Catholic and the secular model. His article is entitled, "Dual Loyalties in Catholic Theology: Finding Truth in Alien Texts," where the dual loyalties in question are precisely to the Catholic tradition, and to the Enlightenment.6 "To this extent the theologian has traditions and not simply a tradition . . . We are no longer in a single tradition on which we can draw for spiritual substance; we are in traditions of faith and we can and we must draw upon them" (12). More specifically, ". . . it remains that many Catholic theologians now stand firmly within the liberal and Enlightenment traditions as well as within the tradition of their own church." (13). This new tradition Shea also sees as a new revelation. "I know theologians who spend their lives reading these alien texts not simply because they are interesting, nor only because they are important for interpreting the Christian texts, but because they are revelatory in their own right" (9). He implies that the new tradition functions "as a revelation of God's meaning for human beings . . ." (23; emphasis in the original). This new revelation is adhered to with a religious fervor. "I think it is also fair to say that I hold these views with religious intensity" (12). Again, "I think that it is possible to be a Catholic theologian and yet hold certain convictions 'with religious intensity' that do not arise from Catholic sources . . ." (23).

Such, then, is the meaning of Shea's "dual loyalties." "My subject, then, is the development of dual loyalties in theology" (10). These loyalties will require mutual adjustment. "The theologian must come to understand the new loyalty and its relation to the old loyalty to Catholic and Christian texts" (9).

Shea is quite well aware that this new loyalty puts him in a position quite different from his original Catholic commitment. "The situation is new, the requirements and range of theology are new. We know, of course, that the new includes the old, but it is not the old and never will be" (22). "Over the years a sea-change occurred in my understanding of and attitude toward my religious and political heritage" (11).

Is it possible to be loyal to two traditions at once? It would not appear impossible. Thomas Aquinas, to take a preeminent example, was loyal to both the Christian tradition and to Aristotle. But it should be noted that one loyalty was firmly subordinated to the other. In the original justification of the use of Greek philosophy, Christians saw themselves as "taking tribute of the Egyptians." Philosophy was recognized to possess its own truth; but it functioned in theology as the ancilla theologiae.

A dual loyalty becomes particularly problematic when the two traditions contradict one another. Then a choice must be made; the words of Jesus come to mind: "No man can serve two masters" (Matt. 6:24). Trying to have it both ways will only result in incoherence. When Thomas recognized incompatibilities between the Catholic tradition and Aristotle-as on the eternal creation of the world, or the existence of divine providence-he unhesitatingly rejects the Aristotelian position, and affirms the Christian one.

Is William Shea, then, proposing such an ordered set of loyalties, one firmly subordinate to the other? Seemingly not: as already seen, he advocates a new tradition, as a new revelation, to be held with religious intensity. The new texts may pass judgment on the old. "The Enlightenment criticism of traditional theology is correct: ecclesiastical dogmatism makes genuine faith and belief impossible" (12). In the new situation, "Theology for me runs between and among the texts" (12). In the ultimate analysis-Jesus' words about two masters again come to mind-the loyalty must be to the new rather than the old. "Loyalty to the human community is an ideal that transcends loyalty to tribe, nation, class, and to church" (12).

The conclusion can only be the same as it was with the CTS statement: the ultimate loyalty is to a secular, Enlightenment model of the university, not to the Catholic one. To the extent that the CTS and the CTSA speak for American theologians, and to the extent the theologians accurately express the commitments of their university colleagues, the future of the Catholic university in the next century in the U.S. appears dim.

Practical applications

Is there any possibility of changing this? Institutions are changed by transforming the people within them; for the university, that means particularly the professors and administrators, for the students are a more transient population-though they, too, affect the collective allegiance of the institution.

The importance of Ex Corde Ecclesiae's requirement that at least half the faculty should be Catholic emerges here.7 Much ink has been spilled and energy expended over the question of the theological mandate,8 but perhaps the Catholicity of the faculty is, in the long run, more important for the Catholic identity of the university. Clearly, hiring practices in inducting future faculty will be crucial: do they function according to a Catholic or an Enlightenment model of the university? The distance that most Catholic colleges and universities stand from fulfillment of this requirement may be judged from the fact that, in many of them, the information as to the number of teachers who are Catholic is not even to hand.

The question of the future of the Catholic university in the United States, then, becomes the question whether a critical mass of faculty and administrators, committed to the Catholic model of the university, is present, or can be hired in the foreseeable future. In my sober estimate, that is likely in a minority of universities, which may resist the cultural trends, but not in a majority. In those the present commitment is already more inclined toward the Enlightenment model of the university, and this allegiance will govern future hiring; in due time the inexorable current of American secularism will carry them into the mainstream. Nevertheless, God's grace, the possibility of conversion, and the surprises of history are never to be ruled out.

Before closing, one practical suggestion may be offered. What could be helpful at the present juncture would be a National Catholic Accrediting Association. Its norms would be those of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, along with any additional regulations promulgated on the national level. Accountability would be to the national body of bishops, and perhaps to the Vatican Congregation on Catholic Education. Catholic colleges and universities would be invited to apply for membership; upon application, a visiting team would be sent to ascertain whether the university was in compliance with the norms of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, or what would have to be done to bring it into compliance. Periodic visitations would then be provided for to monitor the ongoing Catholic identity of the university.

One advantage of this initiative would be that it would be voluntary, thus respecting a trait deeply imbedded in the American culture. Such an initiative, of course, would not rule out, but rather work in conjunction with, other inducements to compliance with Catholic norms.

A second advantage would be that the visiting teams could be assembled from national resources. Though Ex Corde Ecclesiae puts a great stress on the local bishop's role in the Catholic identity of the university,9 it may be wondered whether all dioceses, and especially the smaller ones, have the resources effectively to judge and ensure such identity.

Such a solution would not promise immediate benefits. Many Catholic colleges and universities might choose to ignore such accreditation. But in time it could become an accolade for a Catholic university to claim membership in the accrediting association. The local bishop might find ways to nudge local institutions of Catholic higher education to apply. Eventually, in the course of the next century, it may become clear that those who do not apply or fail to attain membership may have effectively abandoned the Catholic model of the university, and embraced the Enlightenment model. n

1 Marsden's book is published by Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1994. Burtchaell's articles are found in April 1991 and May 1991. The second article has some comments on Catholic universities.

2 Policy Documents and Reports (Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors, 1977).

3 Board of Directors of the College Theology Society, Response to Proposed Ordinances of the Committee on Education of the NCCB on Ex Corde Ecclesiae, Nov. 22, 1993, pp. 1, 2, 4.

4 Ibid., p. 2.

5 Ibid., pp. 1, 2, 4. The CTSA statement, submitted to the Board December 15, 1993, is somewhat briefer, milder and more diplomatic in tone; but the general thrust is the same.

6 Commonweal Jan. 31, 1992, pp. 9-14; he engaged in a further exchange with Rev. Robert Imbelli in Commonweal, April 24, 1992, pp. 21-23, which is also quoted here.

7 Gen. Norms, Art. 4, no. 4.

8 Gen. Norms, Art. 4, no. 3: see also Canon 812.

9 28-29; Gen. Norms, Art. 5, no. 1-2.