Traditional Roman Catholic Universities

[Andreas_Hofer]

As a Thomas Aquinas College grad, I can vouch for its reverence for Tradition. Just check out their new chapel, which was dedicated this past Saturday, the feast of the Angelic Doctor himself:

newliturgicalmovement.org/2009/03/glorious-weekend-of-architecture-and.html

Truly a gem. A pure gem.

I think I disagree with your premise. I don’t consider places that celebrate sacraments in the 1962 form and Tridentine Masses as “traditional.” I consider all Catholic Churches as “traditional” because the Catholic Church is steeped in and bound by Tradition.

I assume all Catholic institutions are faithful to the Magisterium, otherwise they would not be permitted to retain the identifier of “Catholic.”

The naivete of the second statement has already been demonstrated. Georgetown actively funds PP, NOW, and NARAL. It, like many other Jesuit institutions, is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

As for the use of “traditional,” why can’t you just play nice and give traditionalists a word that allows them to distinguish the broad outlines of their spirituality? There are Catholics who prefer to live in very strong continuity with the past so many repudiated in 1965-70, and it doesn’t hurt anyone to be honest about their appreciation for some of the new forms and expressions of Catholicism that have developed over the last 4 decades. You like the OF? Fine. But don’t refuse a convenient identifier to someone who prefers otherwise just because you recognize that adherence to tradition (as a broadly defined posture) is a good thing for all Catholics.

Of those names, at least Steubenville and Ave Maria really don’t have much claim to be traditional. Both held out against the traditional Latin Mass for as long as they possibly could.

With the above in mind, no those schools don’t really fall into the category of “traditional Catholic.” I have little firsthand knowledge of either, but my impression through my second-hand reading and talking to those who have experienced them is that they are schools truly committed to upholding Catholic orthodoxy and fighting the culture wars, but at Ave Maria from a standpoint of “conservative” Catholicism that prefers to restrain and refine what we have rather than re-adopt traditional piety and methods and at Steubenville from a very modern praise and worship/charismatic renewal standpoint that would make many to most traditional(ist) Catholics somewhat uncomfortable.

I’m reading your (name removed by moderator)ut with interest. My oldest is just about to turn 14, so college is starting to become a topic of discussion around our house. He is interested in a scientific field (perhaps chemistry), so the fit with the existing orthodox Catholic colleges isn’t very good.

That being said, you do present only a single data point. . . . I wonder if you’re not generalizing too broadly from your personal experience?

My thoughts exactly. You will be more competitive for jobs coming out of a top-ranked school, and certain aspects of the academic life will be much more challenging, informative, and fulfilling. But then again, other parts of the academic life at those schools will be no more than intellectually flacid, blind obedience to secular humanist creeds that have little to no basis in reality and everything to do with liberal ideology. Just think of all the “scientists” who ignore the empirical data (isn’t science supposed to have something to do with empirical data) on national condom promotion programs and AIDS prevention, to take the most current example.

For me the question is are you looking to 1) get the highest-paying/most prestigious job possible, 2) get the best education construed in terms of personal formation, or 3) a compromise position between the two. As a student now seeking my third degree at Notre Dame, I opted for number 3 (although since my field is theology there really is no true option one, though I could have opted for secular respectability by getting a doctorate from, say, the University of Chicago). I recognized that Notre Dame gives me an opportunity to get a degree from a top-25 school and thus some prestige attached to the sheepskin and that the academic rigor will be much higher than many more faithful institutions, but that at the same time my good exposure to the Catholic tradition will be intermingled being forced to take some professors who espouse blatant dissent, some heresy, what can be called nothing better than intellectual pablum. My hope is that my choice will position to exert influence away from those so-called Catholic professors and their work, but I would strongly counsel that each of the three options I mentioned is a definite strategic move and needs to be evaluated based on what level of hostility to the faith a student’s formation and character have prepared him to resist successfully (that is, on top of the simple fact of what one wants to get out of the educational experience).

 

[diggerdomer]

The naivete of the second statement has already been demonstrated. Georgetown actively funds PP, NOW, and NARAL. It, like many other Jesuit institutions, is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

As for the use of “traditional,” why can’t you just play nice and give traditionalists a word that allows them to distinguish the broad outlines of their spirituality? There are Catholics who prefer to live in very strong continuity with the past so many repudiated in 1965-70, and it doesn’t hurt anyone to be honest about their appreciation for some of the new forms and expressions of Catholicism that have developed over the last 4 decades. You like the OF? Fine. But don’t refuse a convenient identifier to someone who prefers otherwise just because you recognize that adherence to tradition (as a broadly defined posture) is a good thing for all Catholics.

.

I certainly don’t presume you make naive statements.

My point is that I don’t consider myself informed enough and more importantly I am not the competent authority to definitively teach what Universities/Colleges are “Catholic” or not. I may have my opinions, but they’re just that, and I am not going to discredit someone or some institution by denying they’re Catholic based only on my opinion. Canon Law has requirements for conditions under which institutions may call themselves Catholic, and it also indicates the proper actions to take where errors are being made and the proper authority to take those actions. Until the Church comes out and says any particular institution is no longer able to carry the name Catholic, I will likewise suspend final judgment in case someone could miscontrue my opinion as uncharitable denunciation.

“Traditional” in my mind is too broad a word, too universal a word, to be adopted exclusively by one group or another. Might as well say “Scriptural” Catholics. Sure, we all have part of the Tradition that we might prefer, as we likely have different ideas of the Bible’s role in our faith (within, of course, the parameters taught by the Church". If some groups use these labels, it just comes across to me as saying those who disagree with them are “non-traditional” (or e.g. "non-Scriptural). I consider myself a traditional Catholic because I believe in the Church and its tradition, all the way back to the beginning.

Obviously this is a matter of usage and preference. I just don’t want people to assume there’s only one way to understand and use that word as a Catholic.

Sorry again if I am stating anything naive, just trying to learn.

 

[DavidPalm]

I would strongly counsel that each of the three options I mentioned is a definite strategic move and needs to be evaluated based on what level of hostility to the faith a student’s formation and character have prepared him to resist successfully (that is, on top of the simple fact of what one wants to get out of the educational experience).

Very good, I agree with you 100%. It really does depend on the individual student. Some are able to plug into or even help to create the necessary sub-culture that can provide the mutual support necessary to weather the trials of the prevailing secular counter-culture. But some students are not prepared for this and they could easily get swept away. They need more of a “hot house” environment, even at the college level.

There is also one additional item that concerns me and that is the general point that an education in which it is quite literally illegal to include the Catholic Faith in the curriculum by definition cannot be better than one in which Catholicism suffuses the curriculum. So this really touches on the larger question of what makes for a good education. And as others have touched on already, just because our prevailing culture answers that question with the answer “the one that gets you the best job” doesn’t make it so.

 

[rosetta_stone]

for traditional probably Thomas Aquinas College and Wyoming Catholic

Ave Maria does offer the EF and latin and gregorian chant classes are part of the mandatory curriculum. Although not traditionalist the University of Dallas is orthodox, and quite good academically(I don’t think there is an EF on campus but a number of churches in Dallas offer it). It also has an amazing study abroad program in Rome.

I am a senior and have been accepted to both Ave Maria and University of Dallas (undecided still). I visited TAC and did their summer program and decided it wasn’t for me (too Straussian and no history in the curriculum).

 

[Extempore]

Of those names, at least Steubenville and Ave Maria really don’t have much claim to be traditional. Both held out against the traditional Latin Mass for as long as they possibly could.

Agreed. I went to Franciscan for undergrad and its not a traditional school (though, to be fair, they have been friendlier recently towards their traditional Catholic students).

The same goes for Ave Maria. Can’t speak for the undergraduate, but I went to their law school for a bit before transferring. While the quality of education was commendable, I wouldn’t label the school as “traditional” by any stretch. Then again, as I transferred to a “Catholic-in-name-only” school, I guess one should be content with the fact that they weren’t actively attempting to distort catholic teaching.

And, given the cost of education these days, the cheaper state schools are tempting in many respects, especially if you can commute and avoid living on campus.

I would love to send my children to Thomas Aquinas College, but we’ll see what God wills. Also, I’ve got my eye on the new Wyoming Catholic College, especially for my horse fanatic daughter.

A close friend of mine went there, and I’ve heard very good things about that school. Christendom also seems to be very solid and, from what I’ve heard, offers a bit of a broader curriculum.

 

[JKsoren]

I’m reading your (name removed by moderator)ut with interest. My oldest is just about to turn 14, so college is starting to become a topic of discussion around our house. He is interested in a scientific field (perhaps chemistry), so the fit with the existing orthodox Catholic colleges isn’t very good.

That being said, you do present only a single data point. There are loads of Catholics who have gone to secular universities and lost their faith. You say that the professors were better and I believe you. But again, there are secular institutions in which many of the professors, especially in certain departments, are propagandists rather than educators. In addition, I can’t help but think that there are many where there simply isn’t enough of a traditional Catholic presence in order to create the necessary sub-culture that you’re describing. And there can be other significant hurdles, such as those schools which mandate a one or two year stay in the dorms for the new student. Forget it, that’s just not an option for any of my kids. So I wonder if you’re not generalizing too broadly from your personal experience?

I do indeed represent a “single data point”, however, I must point out that there is a huge difference between myself (and probably yourself and your family) and the majority of students going to college campuses that self identify with Catholicism. That is, your kids probably actually understand what it is that they profess to believe whereas most students who go into college and report that they lost their faith didn’t really have much of a faith to speak of in the first place: didn’t know the teachings, didn’t know the history, didn’t have a prayer life, didn’t receive the sacraments very often or worthily, etc. They can’t really be said to be “fallen away” and they are almost always described (self described even) that way.

There is a pervasive myth about our nations top universities, one which I recently heard spread by conservative talk radio. Namely, there are people claiming that American colleges seek no other end but the propagation of some kind or radical liberal agenda, as if it were some kind of deliberate conspiracy, and that our students are coming away “indoctrinated” (this same argument could actually be used against schools such as Franciscan!). This isn’t, in my experience, really true(…and I went to UCLA!). First of all, the vast majority of my professors were NOT relativists by any means. Perhaps the only relativists I knew of were in art or literature departments, but everyone else: history, the sciences, philosophy, political science, etc were very much openly engaged in some kind of genuine pursuit of truth and goodness. This leads to my second point… they all disagree with each other! Sure, most are what we might call “liberal” and many are indeed atheists, but the fact is, they are not conspiring to brainwash students into their views, rather, they attempt to get students to really think. If you disagree with them on a certain issue the very good professors will hear you out, but only if you really have a good REASON to disagree with them.

In my experience, this kind of environment is good for your faith, if your faith is rooted in the pursuit of the truth and not just a coping mechanism that is. Atheist roommate? What better opportunity to not only learn what atheists really think, but to share the Gospel! Professor advocates abortion? What better opportunity to learn the errors of such a stance so that one can better refute it! Going to such a university actually made me a sharpened Catholic, not a faithless one, because with God’s grace (and it’s always there) I charged forward after the truth wherever I could find and I learned a TON. It was a very very good experience and thoroughly stimulating.

You are right about one thing. My experience at UCLA was unique, and you must know that the vast majority of my “traditional” friends were Korean, Phillipino, etc. Two things: 1) UCLA attracts this kind of odd demographic (like half the school is asian) 2) this odd concentration of asian students also come from families that remain religious in comparison to the majority in America. Thus, I did have a unique experience. However, talking to friends who went to other top public universities, they were also able to have very good Catholic community life despite having more typical demographics at their schools. I think that by going to a respected LARGE public university, that one greatly increases the chances for having such good Catholic communities. UCLA, Texas A&M, Purdue, Pitt, and I think the University of Florida, all come to mind as places I know (think I know) where catholic flourish.

 

[Sarpedon]

I am a current senior and I am planning to go to the University of Dallas. Through my college search, I found the Newman Guide to be very inadequate. In the guide, each school is given glowing reviews that sound like they were copied from the school’s admissions website. Through the grapevine of my college-age friends, I have found out several serious things about the various orthodox schools that were never really addressed in the guide. This helped make my decision easier. PM me if you want.

 

[Brian_Albin]

Sulpician,
I see at the web site of St Mary’s, Baltimore; that St Mary’s is operated by the Sulpicians. Is this considered helpful? From what I read there, I thought perhaps this is of interest only to students seeking to become Pastors, but am not sure.

 

[una_fides]

Does anyone here know something of the quality of St Mary’s Seminary and University in Baltimore?

Or closer to my home, The Seminary attached to Mount Angel Abbey in western Oregon?

Thanks

Not so good. I know a liberal deacon that teaches there, and Maryland is a very liberal area so I can only conclude that most likely the school has many others of the same breed.

 

[tr1strev]

Not so good. I know a liberal deacon that teaches there, and Maryland is a very liberal area so I can only conclude that most likely the school has many others of the same breed.

I’ll agree to an extent. St. Mary’s in Baltimore has a very poor reputation for adhering to traditional teaching as well as having a blatant homosexual culture in the past. As for Maryland being a liberal state that is true but Mt. Saint Mary’s Seminary in Emmitsburg, MD has an outstanding reputation for orthodox teaching.

 

[soflochristmas]

I think I disagree with your premise. I don’t consider places that celebrate sacraments in the 1962 form and Tridentine Masses as “traditional.” I consider all Catholic Churches as “traditional” because the Catholic Church is steeped in and bound by Tradition.

I assume all Catholic institutions are faithful to the Magisterium, otherwise they would not be permitted to retain the identifier of “Catholic.”

So, given my assumptions which probably don’t match yours, any recommendations I have would likely not be terribly helpful as you seem to be looking for a more exclusive and restrictive experience than I’m familiar with.

Peace

Agreed! I wish we’d get away from the use and reference to “traditionalism” and speak more of orthodoxy, with a small “o”. Is Ave Maria orthodox? Good enough to me.

 

[the_hibernian]

I have to ask you what you mean by “getting a job” or what kind of jobs you have in mind? Plus, I have SO much more than just employment in mind when I talk about the value of going to a good university. I mean the whole experience. I have lived BOTH, and let me tell you, the small fringe Catholic college does not compare well at all. Not even close.
I had better professors, better classes, better classmates, a better learning environment, better resources, better amenities, and yes…believe it or not…just as good if not better Catholic community life.

It is true that you can get “a job” (whatever you mean by that) after coming out of Franciscan. But I am not sure if you can get a very good job. If you want to admit anecdotal evidence then in my experience, people I know, don’t do very well financially coming out the MA theology program…of course this makes sense though.

There is a difference between getting a purely academic/non-practical (philosophy, theology, English, physics, etc) degree and getting a more practical degree (nursing, engineering, education, business). Landing “a job” with a practical degree, even from Franciscan, is not too hard. Landing one with competitive pay in a better place to live (than the Ohio valley) is an entirely different story. You bet you britches that a student with a BA in business from Harvard is going to have a MUCH “easier” time finding GOOD internships working at/for top companies right out of undergrad than almost anyone coming from a school like Franciscan or Ave Maria. In fact, its so competitive to get such an internship that I doubt someone with a non-competitive BA from a fringe Catholic school will do very well at all.

Academic degrees are a little different to work with. It is still possible to get internships, etc, but the truth is most people who major in academic degrees in college (most astute people anyway) do so because they intend to teach or research in their chosen field someday. That means that getting a BA/BS is not sufficient. Many people who get such degrees without thinking about what they are going to do afterward are in the situation that they are in because of bad planning. They didn’t realize that they were making it more difficult to enter the work force (if that is all they intended). Thus, yes, simply HAVING A DEGREE does not equal guaranteed jobs.

But to deny the advantages, as far as the job market is concerned, of going to a top university is naive and/or wishful thinking. I went to UCLA, there I said it, and the opportunities that I had post graduation were STAGGERING. There were many people seeking to recruit our graduates for work at major corps, government agencies, NGO’s, etc, etc. They were literally coming to us. Plus the job placement resources that we had were incredible. They would help you with the entire process: from filling out a resume to practicing interviewing skills! It was amazing! Nothing even close can be said of what they do at Franciscan, and few if any of our students get “recruited” in this way. When I graduated, most of my friends either went on to top graduate schools or professional schools, places like USC, Notre Dame, Univ. Wisconsin, etc. These are my Catholic friends by the way. I have yet to even directly hear of anyone going on to schools like this from Franciscan.

There are a lot of things “wrong” or I should say “worse” with the colleges like Franciscan. People are seriously selling themselves short and they don’t even know it, they are missing out on so many important opportunities and experiences and it is a shame. I should point out that people who narrowly defend schools like Franciscan (especially people who cannot claim to have actually experienced both a good school and a school like and Franciscan) are themselves actually operating under a false assumption. Namely, that you HAVE to go to Franciscan to be a good Catholic or to experience good/faithful Catholic community life. This is just NOT true. There are many very good and even holy people who will NEVER set foot on Franciscan’s soil.

“If you can’t get a job, then the college would not exist.”…I don’t know what you mean here.

“National rankings mean absolutely nothing. Schools across the country are pulling out of the national rankings.”…This is absurd. Where on earth did you hear of any school pulling out of the rankings? What does that mean? They rank you, you don’t rank yourself…plus the only reason I could see schools refusing to cooperate with this is because they fared very badly. Schools with terribly rankings, for instance, don’t advertise things like this: “ranked at the top 25 of the fourth tier in the 2009 US News and World Report!” No, instead they give slanted information in order to basically lie about being prestigious…like Franciscan University does when they claim that “we are ranked among the best schools in our [terrible] region!”. Which, of course, doesn’t mean diddly. But you won’t believe how many people are actually fooled by that less than honest claim! (or check out the website…It claims, as of right now, that Franciscan is a “top ten school”!!! How? Because some website ranked them among the then “most conservative colleges”! WOW.

And as for rankings not mattering? That is definitely absurd. But I have already said enough about that. They matter, big time.

A school being “very far away” is a terrible reason not to attend said school. If a school is good enough, has what you need and/or looking for then you simply don’t let things like distance get in the way. I, unfortunately, moved all the way across the country to live the Catholic dream at Franciscan. You have to go for it when the opportunity presents itself. I truly hope that you open your mind and aim as high as you can for your education. If anything, at least consider a good state school. You’ll save a ton and get a better education.

A couple nits to pick…

Business degrees are rarely, if ever, BAs. BSs and BBAs are much more common.

With few exceptions, the very top universities (e.g., Harvard/Princeton/Yale) do not offer undergraduate degrees in business.

 

[DavidPalm]

Agreed! I wish we’d get away from the use and reference to “traditionalism” and speak more of orthodoxy, with a small “o”. Is Ave Maria orthodox? Good enough to me.

This only works if those Catholics, albeit orthodox, are not involved in the practice of and promotion of a passel of post-conciliar novelties. That’s where the needed distinction comes in. To list said novelties would hijack this thread, but since two people expressed this same sentiment I thought it would be worth explaining, at least in brief, why such a distinction is needed.

 

[Extempore]

diggerdomer:

I assume all Catholic institutions are faithful to the Magisterium, otherwise they would not be permitted to retain the identifier of “Catholic.”.

While I applaud your optimistic outlook, that statement is simply not true in light of reality. The Magisterium doesn’t actively police every Catholic university in the world for “faithfulness”. Its up to the students in many cases, to recognize error when they see it. Unfortunately, there are many “Catholic” universities out there that spread teaching contrary and false teachings. I hardly need name the foremost US examples of these schools - most of us know the names already.

Its a sad but true fact today that going to a school with the name “Catholic” on it, isn’t going to guarantee traditional/orthodox/correct teachings.

 

[diggerdomer]

While I applaud your optimistic outlook, that statement is simply not true in light of reality. The Magisterium doesn’t actively police every Catholic university in the world for “faithfulness”. Its up to the students in many cases, to recognize error when they see it. Unfortunately, there are many “Catholic” universities out there that spread teaching contrary and false teachings. I hardly need name the foremost US examples of these schools - most of us know the names already.

Its a sad but true fact today that going to a school with the name “Catholic” on it, isn’t going to guarantee traditional/orthodox/correct teachings.

Well, then, I guess in the end I have to choose between the Magisterium or those that you identify to help the Church know what institutions warrant maintaining “Catholic” in their name.

Hmmm.

I’m kind of leaning toward sticking with the Magisterium. No offense intended, to you or the random “students” you refer to.

Thanks.

 

[soflochristmas]

This only works if those Catholics, albeit orthodox, are not involved in the practice of and promotion of a passel of post-conciliar novelties. That’s where the needed distinction comes in. To list said novelties would hijack this thread, but since two people expressed this same sentiment I thought it would be worth explaining, at least in brief, why such a distinction is needed.

I don’t see the distinction. Or perhaps if there is one, I’m more concerned with orthodoxy than tradition.

 

[soflochristmas]

Well, then, I guess in the end I have to choose between the Magisterium or those that you identify to help the Church know what institutions warrant maintaining “Catholic” in their name.

Hmmm.

I’m kind of leaning toward sticking with the Magisterium. No offense intended, to you or the random “students” you refer to.

Thanks.

We are required to use our brain. We have a responsibility to exercise judgement beyond just those things which the Magisterium speaks on. In fact, most reform through the ages has come from the laity and NOT the Magisterium. But before I get flamed, I would make a distinction between reform in contradiction to the Magisterium and reform in support of or which is not contradicted by it.

 

[Extempore]

Well, then, I guess in the end I have to choose between the Magisterium or those that you identify to help the Church know what institutions warrant maintaining “Catholic” in their name.

My point (which seems to have sailed past you) is that the Catholic Church does not actively police every Catholic school that operates under that name.

Thus it is ridiculous, and perhaps even ignorant, to try to say that every school bearing the “Catholic” title promulgates true Catholic teaching. Do I honestly need to list all the examples of some of today’s Catholic universities that spread false and contrary teaching yet retain the “Catholic” identity? These aren’t subtle points of theology either but things that EVERY Catholic should know to be wrong (e.g. condoning abortion, euthanasia, homosexual acts, etc).

 

[diggerdomer]

My point (which seems to have sailed past you) is that the Catholic Church does not actively police every Catholic school that operates under that name.

Well, then, if the Church doesn’t why do so many individuals feel called to do so, apparently? Is the Church falling down on the job?

 

[Extempore]

Well, then, if the Church doesn’t why do so many individuals feel called to do so, apparently? Is the Church falling down on the job?

Called to do what - avoid schools that condone teaching contrary and doctrinally incorrect things?

I don’t think the Church interviews every professor that a Catholic university hires or examines every outside speaker that comes in or every student group or cause that the school financially supports. This are things that, for better or worse, are left to us to fish out.

For instance, hypothetically speaking, if my school is awarding public service credit for volunteering at Planned Parenthood, this should raise a big red flag.