Chaplaincy, Newman Club or Catholic college


Chaplaincy,

Newman Club or

Catholic College

By

WILFRID PARSONS, S.J.

Editor, “AMERICA”

PRICE FIVE CENTS

Second Printing

THE AMERICA PRESS
Printing Crafts Bldg.

Eighth Avenue and 33rd Street

New York, N. Y.



(Reprinted from America

,

September 4, 11, 18, 1926)

DeaefdSfled



Chaplaincy, Newman Club
or Catholic College

“AV7HAT are we going to do with the Catholic stu-
* * dents in the non-Catholic colleges ?” one was ask-

ing, and the other answered, laconically: “Get ’em out.”

Thus did a correspondent sum up for me the discussion
between the Rev. Ignatius W. Cox, S.J., and the Rev.

J. W. R. Maguire, C.S.V., which enlivened the sessions
of the recent Louisville educational convention. As a
summary it was not bad. The question seemed fairly put,

and the answer expresses the ultimate aim not only of

Father Cox and those who think with him, but of the
Catholic Church. The ultimate aim, I said. But the vital

question comes when the query is put: “But meanwhile,

until you get them out of there, what are you going to do

with them?”

The real debate, naturally, hinges upon the answer

to this further question, what is our proximate aim, what

are we going to do here and now? It is not too strong
to say that the immediate future of the Church in this

country depends on the right answer to this question.

On the one hand, the eternal interests of the students
themselves might be compromised by too rigid and nar-

row-minded a handling of their case, and, on the other,

by going too far in helping them, Catholic education in

this country runs the risk of being set back a hundred

years. Yet certain groups are calling for some solution

of a problem that is engaging the serious attention of

thinkers in educational circles.

The answer, when it comes, will be one which takes ac-
count of the one all-important fact. That all-important

fact is this : that the problem of the Catholic at the sec-

ular college is not a separate problem in itself, but merely

3



one part of the main problem, which is the problem of

the education of all Catholics. To attempt to solve one
part of this problem at the expense of the other parts of

it, would be illogical and might lead to disastrous results.

To take the Catholic at the secular college and treat him
as if he were a problem in himself, irrespective of the

whole great question of the education of Catholics, is to

take a merely partial view of the subject. It will easily

be seen to what such a procedure might lead. Energies

will be used up which should be turned elsewhere, and the

whole emphasis of Catholic attention in the country be

focussed in thq wrong direction.

This is no exaggerated view of the matter. This fact

of the essential unity of the education question is so im-

portant, and so much in danger of being overlooked, that
I wish to emphasize it, at the outset of this analysis, with

all the power at my command. If the partial problem,
that of the Catholic at the secular college, is solved to

the prejudice of the major part of the problem, which is

the education of Catholics in the Catholic college

,

then

Catholic education will suffer irreparable harm. The

whole problem is one

,

and no part of it can be handled

without reference to all other parts, and in due proportion.

Consequently the question : what shall we do with the

Catholics at the secular colleges here and now?—will of
course continue to be answered by the stock “something

must be done,” but that something will be something

within due limits, and these limits will dictate both what

is to he done and how extensive it will be.
In other words, remembering: (1) that our ultimate

aim is to get all Catholic students, if possible, into the

Catholic institution, and (2) that the major part of the

problem is the Catholic student in the Catholic college, not

the Catholic student in the secular college, we will still
bend our main efforts to the building up of the Catholic

college, and on the other hand, do nothing which will make

it ultimately impossible, or extremely difficult, to get the

4



bulk of Catholic students, gradually and in due time,

away from the secular college. These are the positive

and negative aspects of the question, and both of them

will be disregarded if the Catholic establishments at the

non-Catholic colleges are built up out of due limits.

I take it for granted, of course, that since the Louis-

ville convention there is no longer doubt in people’s

minds that Catholic education and education at the non-

Catholic college are irreconcilable, no matter what cor-

rectives are offered for the latter. In the heat of argu-

ment, there have not been wanting those who have de-
fended education at a non-Catholic college as in itself de-

sirable and allowable. This position, indeed, came as a

reaction to the assertion of our ultimate aim to reduce

as far as possible the number of legitimate students there.

Some, it is true, took the position imagining they thus

defended the chaplaincy or Newman club. For the good
of their cause they were well advised to abandon it. The

Church only tolerates the presence of Catholic students

at non-Catholic institutions, at the same time that she

commands the shepherds of the flock to safeguard their

faith in dangerous circumstances.

That this is not a personal or party attitude has been

proved over and over again, in America and elsewhere.
The Church has an official theory of education

;
the Popes

in letters to England, Ireland and this country, the Code

of Canon Law, the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore,

and individual bishops, before that and since, have laid

it out in almost complete detail. The only education
which receives the cordial sanction of the Church is a

religious education, that is, not one merely in which re-

ligion is taught as a subject, but one in which the truths

of natural and revealed religion pervade every course in

the curriculum.

Nor is this an arbitrary stand of the Church from any
point of view. Looking at education from a psychological

point of view, the religious atmosphere of a Catholic

5



school cannot be replaced; from a moral point of view,

the example of teacher and companion is not found else-

where; from a religious point of view, the knowledge of

the Faith and the practice of its precepts are in danger

everywhere except there
;
from an intellectual point of

view, the Catholic mind is formed only where the truths

of religion are the postulates of everything that is taught

;

and this latter is especially true in higher education, and

is even more important than any of the others, for it is

the foundation of the others.

Having thus cleared the ground, and arranged a basis

of complete general agreement, I propose to submit the

whole question to analysis, in the hope that, with all the

elements of both the problem and the solution in clear

sight, assent may be yielded at once to a reasonable thesis.
The problem is easily stated. According to recent

figures, nearly one half of all our Catholic students are

being educated in non-Catholic colleges and universities.

This means that we have two classes of Catholic students
in this country, about equally divided. One class is being
educated under the auspices of the Church, according to

the tried pedagogical principles of the Church. The char-

acter of its members is being formed by the fourfold ac-

tion named above, psychological, moral, spiritual and in-

tellectual.

The other class is listening to lectures which at the

best are pagan in the cleanest sense. First, from this edu-

cation the supernatural is excluded, and often denied in it

;

and the supernatural is the basis of the Christian forma-

tion of youth. Secondly, whether the course followed be

literary, scientific or practical, many truths are excluded
or denied, which constitute the whole color and form of

the Catholic mind, and whose exclusion discolors and de-

forms it. Thirdly, religious teaching, if any, is only an

accidental, and religious practice the exception.

This class, thus exposed to admitted danger, is again

divided into two, those who could without serious incon-

6



venience receive the same courses in a Catholic institution,

and those who cannot without serious inconvenience re-

ceive the same courses in a Catholic institution. It will

be at once evident that in any discussion of the rights of

these students and the duty of the Church to them, there

will be a sharp distinction between these two sections.

The mere statement of the position of our Catholic

young men and women in secular institutions is the state-
ment of their problem. It is a threefold problem. 1. How
shall we reduce their number, in this school generation or

the next, to the smallest possible figure? 2. What shall
be done for those who are there now or will be in the
future, to safeguard their faith and morals in the midst

of conceded danger? 3. What are the limits, consistent
with Catholic doctrine and needs, within which this work

for such students should be carried on?

It will be noticed at once that this statement of the

problem expressly assumes that the Catholic students at

the secular colleges are not to be neglected, but that on

the contrary they are to be cared for in every way con-
sistent with the general welfare of the Church.

II

I have just laid the groundwork for a discussion of

the burning question of the care of the Catholic at the

non-Catholic college. As a first general principle I held
that this question is only a part of the larger question of

the education of all Catholics, and that any attempted

solution of it must take account of our whole general

policy of education, that it cannot be handled as a separate

problem in itself, and that to try to do so would cause

serious embarrassment to our system of Catholic educa-

tion. I thereupon freely admitted the existence of a

problem of these Catholic students, and said that it arose

both from the large number of those attending non-Cath-

7



olic colleges and universities, and from the inherent dan-

ger of their surroundings.

This situation, however, admittedly grave, does not

give rise to the simple question “what is going to be done

for them? or even “what is going to be done with

them?
,,

but to a whole series of questions. Are we pre-
pared to admit that our ultimate aim is to get as many as
possible of them out of these colleges ? And if so, are we
prepared to face the consequences of such an admission ?

And the first thing to remember in this connection is that
if we do succeed in reducing their number very consider-
ably, the problem will have almost disappeared, for those

who remain can be very easily handled. And on the other
hand, if we go too far in “doing something” for them,
we may very easily render the problem impossible of so-
lution forever, for then we will never “get 'em out.”

I am not, of course, treating of the rights and wrongs
of attendance of Catholics at secular institutions

;
I take

that as settled by the authority of the Church. Similarly,

defense of such attendance is beside the point, and not an

argument against the thesis of these papers, which have

to do with the practical questions of the limits within

which work for such students should be confined.

This practical question follows upon another of more

speculative interest. It is this: “Should the Church en-

gage in work for these students?” That question is

answered in two ways : first, the Church is already en-

gaged in such work in numerous secular colleges and

universities
;
and secondly, the Holy See has expressly

commanded it. Thus the ground is cleared at last for the

immediate problem: “What kind of work shall be done

for these students, and how far shall it be carried?”
The law of the Church on this subject merely states

(Can. 1374) that religious instruction shall be available

to such students as attend secular institutions. There-

fore, it is not true to say that the chaplaincy or the New-
man Club or the Foundation is commanded by the Holy

8



See. The obligation imposed by positive law is fulfilled

if it is made possible for these students to receive reli-

gious instruction. Thus far the positive law, as binding

both the authorities and the students.

What of the laws of justice and charity? The
Church’s law is fulfilled if the pastor of the parish in

which the students live sees that they have religious in-

struction. Do the interests of the students require that
more than this be done for them ? It is held and seriously

urged that experience has shown that only a resident

chaplain can do what should be done for them, that the

Church should enter the university just as it enters any

town or city, and exercise its pastoral care on the Catholic

students through a full-time chaplain. The Catholic or

Newman Club which he establishes there will be for the
few who are interested, but the chaplain will be for all
Catholic students in the institution, who will be under him
as parishioners are under their pastor.

Naturally, since there is no general law on the subject,

the establishment of such a full-time chaplain is a mat-

ter for each individual to decide for itself, according to

the emergencies there, arising from local conditions. I

merely wish here to discuss the expediency of such a

course, and the limits within which one has a just right

to expect that it will be carried out.

There are several considerations which bear on this

subject. In many universities the Catholics have no just
reason for being present. The Holy See has not yet ab-

solutely condemned their presence there; the Holy See

reprobates it, but tolerates it, on condition that they can-

not without serious inconvenience receive their education

in a Catholic institution. If they can do so, they have no

just reason for being in a non-Catholic institution. In

any discussion of rights, say as against the right of a

Catholic college to be helped, it is clear that the Catholic

in a secular college yields precedence.

Moreover, what is done for those who can show title

9



to being rightly in a secular institution (permission of the

Bishop in certain conditions) is also subject to grave

qualifications. Their problem, as I have said, is only part,

and the minor part, of the great general question of the

education of Catholics in* this country. This is so true

that, if our Catholic colleges—the major part of the prob-
lem—are built up to such a degree that they can care for
the great majority of Catholic students, then the problem

of the Catholic at the secular institution will be reduced

to almost disappearing proportions.

Our first duty, therefore, is to see to it that this happy
consummation be not made impossible. It could be made

impossible in two ways : by diverting our resources in men
and money away from the Catholic college into the sec-

ular college to such a degree that the Catholic college

is crippled, and by building up the position of the Catho-

lic student at the secular college so strongly that it will

be well nigh impossible to dislodge him, even if the Cath-

olic college problem is satisfactorily solved.

Such an unfortunate situation would be vastly aggra-

vated if, as was for a time threatened, the Catholic es-

tablishment at the secular institution were to be offered

as a substitute for a Catholic college, and the public were

to be led to believe it just as safe and profitable to attend

there, as at a Catholic college. As a statement of theory
and a philosophy of education such a position was repro-

bated at the Louisville educational convention, and rightly.

Nevertheless, even if the theory is expressly aban-

doned, the impression will always remain. This, too,

therefore, is a consideration to be borne in mind in deter-

mining the scope of the chaplain’s work at the secular

university. No matter how well explained or how well
defended, the presence of the chaplain at a secular univer-

sity will always be an argument for many people that they
may send their sons there, even if their title to so doing is
not at all clear. And this result will be the surer, the more
active and the greater is the scope of the chaplain’s work.

10



Indeed the very zeal of the chaplain,—and there are very
zealous ones—increases the difficulty. Here, then, is an-
other reason for the restriction of the scope of the chap-

laincy, and it affects the personal activities of the chap-

lain less than the material size of the establishment erected.

Lastly, there is the question of whether the student at

the secular college should be given anything more than

the usual religious instruction and the personal direction,

enlightenment and correction, which an intelligent and ac-

tive chaplain usually gives.

This question, too, cannot be answered, like all the

others, without reference to the whole problem. If, for-

tunately, our colleges were well supplied with professors

and buildings, if, in a word, the student in the Catholic

college were adequately taken care of, I hardly think there

would be objection to further educational activities under-

taken by the chaplain, if such activities did not act as a

magnet to draw students away from Catholic colleges.

But has that time come? Are our Catholic colleges so

well equipped? The presence of so many Catholics at
secular colleges is a partial answer to that. And a visit
to any of the Catholic institutions will supply the rest.

Once again, if the chaplains enter definitely the educa-

tional field, as distinct from the pastoral, in the present

state of our Catholic colleges, these latter are sure to

suffer from neglect still more than they do now.

To sum up, therefore, this discussion: only a clear
title to presence at a non-Catholic college gives a student a

full right to all the ministrations of the Church specially

designed for him as a college student. Such a title con-

sists of the special permission of the local Bishop in the

case where he cannot receive the educational facilities

which he demands at a Catholic college; and not neces-

sarily at the local Catholic college.

In those places where attendance at a secular college is

a practical necessity, the work for Catholic students is sub-

ject to certain grave restrictions. As a general principle

11



the work cannot in justice be such as would cripple Cath-

olic education itself, or make impossible our expressed aim
of having all, or nearly all, of our young people in Cath-

olic colleges. What is being done cannot be presented as
a substitute for a Catholic education, nor as an excuse for

attendance at the secular college, where other reasons are

absent. Moreover, the general principle of the prior

rights of the Catholic college will exercise a strict influence

both on the magnitude of the establishment erected and on

the extent of the work of the chaplain himself. It will in

any case exclude him from entering the educational field,

properly so called, at the secular college, and confine him

to his most useful field.

Ill

The objections that can be raised against the thesis up-

held in these articles can be better understood if the thesis,

consisting of two assumptions, three propositions, and a

conclusion, is recalled to mind.

The first assumption is the express, declared mind of

the Church that there is no satisfactory substitute for a

Catholic college education, no matter what correctives are

offered Catholic students in secular colleges. The second

assumption is that our ultimate aim in this country is to

get as many as possible of our college students into Cath-
olic institutions, thus reducing to a minimum the problem
of the Catholics at the secular institutions. These as-

sumptions I do not propose to discuss, as I take it they are

by now universally accepted.
The first proposition based on these assumptions is

that the whole problem is one problem, no part of which

should be solved to the prejudice of any other part. The

second is that the major part of this problem is the

Catholic college, and the minor part the Catholic at the

secular college. The third is that the real solution of

12



the problem of the Catholic at the secular college will come

when complete educational facilities are offered him at the

Catholic college.

The evident conclusion is that, admitting the necessity

of pastoral work for Catholics at secular colleges, then

the prior right of the Catholics at Catholic colleges, and

the prior duty of the others to be in Catholic colleges, pre-

clude any extensive program of expansion of that pas-

toral work until the Catholic colleges have been fully pro-

vided for. Let there be pastoral work for those students,

but let it be within the limits demanded by the general

problem, not subject to the danger of being offered as a

substitute for Catholic education or as an excuse for being

in a secular college, and not such as will make forever im-

possible the ultimate solution.

At the outset let it not be said that this is merely a

negative contribution to the discussion. It is negative

merely as it sets a limit within which a solution is to be

sought. It is extremely positive in that it presents the

only true and lasting solution of the problem, namely,

such a building up of the Catholic colleges as will reduce

the Catholics at secular colleges and universities to a hand-

ful. Any attempt to find the immediate solution in large
Catholic establishments at secular colleges will only end

in disaster.

The solution is not to be looked for in a day. The
immediate solution is to begin immediately to bring Cath-

olics over from secular colleges and if there is not room

now, to begin immediately a nationwide program which

will make it possible to have more and more Catholic
freshmen enter there each year.

I consider as irrelevant any argument against this po-

sition which is merely an argument in favor of attending

non-Catholic institutions. That point is settled. Thus we
are told that Catholics in England and Germany attend
secular universities, therefore why not here? This is not
even a valid argument in favor of attendance at our uni-

13



versifies, for the Holy See only tolerates it there because

there is no provision for Catholic college and university

education in those countries such as we have here. The
Holy See tolerates it here where and when there is no
such provision. The point to be kept in mind is that the
principle of the preeminence of Catholic education must

never be lost. Besides, the attempt to present a secular

education plus a course in Christian doctrine as a Cath-

olic education has been publicly disavowed.

Likewise, the claim that we must have in this country
more contact between Catholic and non-Catholic is beside

the point, and really an argument for attendance at secu-

lar colleges, and not a good one at that. It fails as an

implication of a fact, that we have not such contact;
there is too much already for certain classes, and no good
has come of it. It fails as a theory, for it means, if it

means anything, in the concrete, that the immature minds

of young Catholics are to be the material of the experi-

ment. Let us have contact, and more of it, but between

the proper people.

An argument that comes nearer the point is drawn
from the fact that in many localities there is no proper
facility for Catholic college and university education.

The existence of such a condition, of course, is no reason

why it should continue, rather the contrary. But while
it does continue, the Holy See has made ample provision

for it, keeping always our own principles intact; for in

those places the Bishops are authorized to give the per-

mission to attend non-Catholic institutions in each par-

ticular case as it arises. But even this case is no ground

for argument that in those localities a large Catholic es-

tablishment in the secular colleges should be built up.

There is in this matter much misapprehension. Mr.

Heithaus showed conclusively from statistics last year in

these columns, that the vast majority of our Catholic

population are well provided with Catholic colleges in

their immediate locality; the curve of population follows

14



inevitably the curve of colleges. If there are not enough

educational facilities in those colleges, it is merely a mat-

ter of time and cooperation until they have enough.

Moreover, it is not true that Catholics depend exclusively

on their local State University. The registration lists show

surprising results along this line. Large numbers go

away from home, and far away, to attend college. The

absence of a Catholic college in the locality is not always,

in fact it is rarely, a valid excuse for presence at a secu-

lar college or university. Such presence will have nearly

always to be excused on other grounds than that.

It has been said : “We are confronted with a condi-
tion, not a theory.” This is not altogether true. We are
confronted with a condition and a theory. And it is only
by recognizing the proper theory that the condition will

be corrected. If that saying is offered as a reason why
we should overlook the Catholic colleges and universities,
and come out strongly in favor of large establishments in

secular colleges merely because there is a large number

of Catholics there, then in our search for a practical solu-

tion, there is grave danger of overlooking the theory, too.

The theory, properly applied, will correct the condition.

The mere number of the Catholics at the non-Catholic

colleges and universities is not in itself a reason for en-

larging and multiplying Catholic facilities for them there,

as has been alleged. The condition is alarming, it is true,

both because there are so many there and because they are
so clearly exposed to danger. It is not like the Catholic

Church to neglect those who are in danger of losing their
souls, no matter how few they are; and where there are
many, the necessity is the more urgent. One would sin
against both charity and justice who would urge their
total abandonment. But their right, clear though it be,

cannot stand against the clearer right of the Catholic

college and its students, if these are to be hurt or hindered.

When these have been fully cared for, it will be time to
talk about enlarging Catholic facilities at the secular col-

15



leges. The immediate problem, if there is one, is the

Catholic college. The very best thing that can be done

for the Catholic at the secular college is to make room for

him at the Catholic college.

But, it is urged, if not the number of these students,

then their quality entitles them to prior consideration. It

has been said that our Catholic leaders have come, and will

continue to come, from secular colleges. This is so un-

tenable a position that one is surprised to see it seriously

advanced. There are literally thousands of communities,

large and small, in this land where the Catholic leaders

are products of Catholic colleges. The number of Cath-

olic leaders from secular colleges, outside of a few men
known chiefly for their wealth, is so notoriously small

that we experience surprise when we encounter any of
them. It is not surprising that they are so few, for it

is an observed fact that one of the effects of a non-Cath-

olic education is that it segregates its subjects almost en-

tirely from the stream of Catholic life and action.

The problem still ahead of us is very great. There is

such a vast amount to be done, both in strengthening our

faculties and courses and in enlarging our material facili-

ties, that one might well despair, if it were not for one

clear fact. That fact is that the distance we have to go
is not nearly so great as the distance we have gone. True,

a large number of our Catholic college students are still

outside the orbit of a Catholic education. But on the

other side we have 176 going concerns caring for 60,000
Catholics already. A few more highly trained professors,
a few more buildings, a few new courses, and an ever

renewed consecration to the highest type of education, and

the work is done. May the dawn of that day be near

!

16