Saint Cardinal John Henry Newman

Play Episode Pause Episode

1x

00:00 / 5:37

RSS Feed

Share

Link

Embed

In Pursuit of Academic Excellence

In his discourses on establishing a university, Saint John HenryNewman, now Doctor of the Church and Co-Patron of Education, defined in flourishing fashion the characteristics of a gentleman.  Too long to quote fully, a portion cited here contains shadows of the moral aspirations of a Christian.  A gentleman:

make(s) every one at their ease and at home. He has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; he can recollect to whom he is speaking; he guards against unseasonable allusions, or topics which may irritate; he is seldom prominent in conversation, and never wearisome. He makes light of favors while he does them, and seems to be receiving when he is conferring. He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort, he has no ears for slander or gossip, is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him, and interprets everything for the best.

Winsome in outline yet one asks: is this as good as it gets? Is their substance behind the shadow?  I think Newman would answer it does not begin to go far enough.  Certainly the Oxford of his youth frustrated him in the vanity and triviality of his classmates’ lives. Yet universities today do not even attempt to inculcate these characteristics; some do not even know whether forming the traits of a gentleman constitute a proper objective; some profess not to know what a man is much less a gentleman.Newman believed that a university should aspire to much more. He would have agreed with Teddy Roosevelt that “to educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society.”

Dr. Newman stands in the shadow, or on the shoulders, of that other great English Saint, Thomas More, the original home-academy scholar, whose daughter Meg was the most educated woman of her day.  More’s instructions to his children’s tutor made plain his highest academic priority:

In a letter to their tutor, More insists that in each subject taught, he should “esteem most whatever may teach them piety towards God, charity to all, and modesty and Christian humility in themselves.”  Only by achieving these “real and genuine fruits of learning” would his children come to possess “solid joy.”

These “real fruits of learning” – piety, charity, modesty, humility- are the institutional goals of a Catholic University, and theaspiration of the Catholic mind: to submit all to Christ, to influence the mind, and to cultivate the moral character of the person. To do less is to fail to educate.

Our Catholic educational aspirations should not slight the spiritual formation in the quest for academic prestige or professional preparation.  More and Newman indeed disparaged the notion of the pursuit of public esteem. More prayed for the grace “not to hang upon the blast of men’s mouths.”  Newman too gave little concern for the opinion of others in his quest for knowledge in the pursuit of Christ:

Christianity professes to prepare us for the next life. It is nothing strange then, if principles, which avowedly direct the science of morals to present beneficial results in the community, should show to the greater advantage in their own selected field of action. Exalted virtue cannot be fully appreciated, nay, is seldom recognized on the public stage of life, because it addresses itself to an unseen tribune. Its actual manifestations on this confused and shifting scene are but partial; just as the most perfect form loses its outline and its proportions, when cast in shadow on some irregular surface.

In our academic and professional pursuits, one should not seek the blast of men’s mouth but rather should follow Newman out of the shadows and into the truth, as his eloquent and self-descriptive epitaph says “ex umbris et imaginibus in veritatem.”