{"id":47,"date":"2018-05-12T14:43:47","date_gmt":"2018-05-12T18:43:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/cheb\/?p=47"},"modified":"2018-05-12T17:15:44","modified_gmt":"2018-05-12T21:15:44","slug":"select-discourses-from-the-idea-of-a-university","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/cheb\/2018\/05\/12\/select-discourses-from-the-idea-of-a-university\/","title":{"rendered":"The Idea of a University"},"content":{"rendered":"

Newman, J. H. (1931).\u00a0Select Discourses from the Idea of a University<\/em>. Cambridge, England: The University Press. Edited with an introduction by May Yardley.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This short book includes Discourses I, V-IX and \u201cLiterature: a Lecture\u201d from Cardinal John Henry Newman\u2019s seminal work: The idea of a university defined and illustrated I. In nine discourses delivered to the Catholics of Dublin II,<\/em> including Discourses I, V-IX and \u201cLiterature: a Lecture\u201d).\u00a0 The original lectures, delivered in 1852, were published as On the Nature and Scope of a University Education<\/em>, later expanded as \u201cthe Idea of University\u201d (the \u201cninth and definitive edition\u201d was revised in 1889 and published in London and New York by Longmans, Green and Co.) The introduction by May Yardley warrants reading as a stand-alone essay and\/or for historical background before reading Newman\u2019s work in its entirety.<\/p>\n

Nineteenth century Britain saw the opening of higher education to \u201cthe lower middle classes\u201d as being \u201cattractive, useful and productive of virtue\u201d (p. vii), with the emphasis on \u201cusefulness\u201d. This drew criticism from traditionalists as \u201cpopularizing a superficial smattering of many subjects at the expense of real education\u201d (viii); and claims that educating \u201cthe masses\u201d meant \u201cthe sacrifice of education itself\u201d (ix). \u00a0So here we see the roots of the ongoing tension between \u201cclassical education\u201d and \u201cvocational training\u201d as well as the beginning of the \u201cbattle between science and religion\u201d.<\/p>\n

Note the relationship to first two of Lonergan\u2019s \u201cchallenges of education\u201d:\u00a0 the masses and \u201cthe new education\u201d.<\/p>\n

Newman was not specifically opposed to \u201cusefulness\u201d or the education of the masses, but rather to the secularization<\/em> of higher education (we might make a parallel with the contemporary \u201ccorporatization\u201d of higher education).\u00a0 Ironically the initial aim of secular education was not to exclude religion, but to make universities open to all religions (in Ireland, specifically to both Catholics and Protestants).\u00a0 Newman was not opposed to this either, although many Catholic leaders, including the Pope [Pius IX] were, but he lamented the exclusion of theology and the breeding of \u201cfalse liberalism\u201d (x). \u00a0Newman later stated that:<\/p>\n

\u201cA University is pledged to admit, without fear, without prejudice, without compromise, all comers, if they come in the name of truth\u201d<\/em> (Lecture on Christianity and Scientific Investigation, 1855, italics mine).\u00a0 This still is (or should be) a cornerstone of Catholic education.<\/p>\n

Newman had \u201cno fear of intellectual freedom \u2026 provided that as much liberty was allowed to religion as to science\u201d (xi).\u00a0 Yardley\u2019s account of Newman \u201cthe man\u201d is permeated by his dedication to truth<\/em>, encapsulated in his assertion that \u201cTruth is wrought out by many minds working freely together\u201d (xviii).\u00a0 His ideal of a university meant teaching \u201cuniversal knowledge\u201d, which includes theology \u2013 so the secular university that omitted theology left a critical gap in knowledge, making it impossible to know \u201cthe whole truth\u201d. \u00a0\u00a0Newman asserted that \u201ctheology is science \u2026 a totality of revealed truths\u201d (xx).<\/p>\n

Of particular relevance today, Newman noted that education is not restricted to the classroom; students learn more from living and conversing with one another than in lectures, hence his insistence on residential colleges: \u201cthe greatest art the student has to learn is of living in and helping to form an intelligent society\u201d (xxii). He saw education as the remedy for the \u201cbesetting sins\u201d of prejudice and narrow mindedness\u201d and the difference between \u201clearning and knowledge\u201d.\u00a0 He saw the real function of a university to be training \u201cgood members of society\u201d (xxiv) which leads to \u201cthe humanizing of society\u201d (xxv).\u00a0 To this end he was also opposed to \u201cpremature specialization\u201d since exclusively studying one subject \u201cdeadens the mind\u201d to other subjects.<\/p>\n

Note Lonergan\u2019s third \u201cchallenge to education\u201d:\u00a0 specialization.<\/p>\n

Yardley is gently critical of Newman\u2019s lack of pragmatism (he says nothing of how his ideal of education is to be achieved), and his lack of a place for post-graduate research, especially in the sciences – how can the boundaries of knowledge be expanded without independent research? (xxvi). But her principle criticism is Newman\u2019s assertion that the role of education is to train the intellect and to create \u201cgood citizens\u201d who do no harm \u2013 which is essentially negative, and is that \u201cgoodness\u201d?\u00a0 Newman believed that conscience, \u201cgoodness\u201d or \u201choliness\u201d does not come from education but only from religion, which is above reason (xxix).\u00a0 This seems somewhat contradictory (recall his insistence on theology and the equality of science and religion) but makes sense in the context that religion and faith are ultimately not taught, but based on an inner revelation between an individual and God*. \u00a0\u00a0He asserts that \u201cas the university does not aim at making men learned or preparing them for a profession, so it cannot make men holy\u201d (xxix).<\/p>\n

Questions<\/h3>\n

How do Newman\u2019s ideas resonate (or fall short) in the context of contemporary Catholic higher education?<\/p>\n