The Idea of a University

The eighth piece of “University Subjects” is a lecture addressed to the School of Science. Here Newman revisits some of the preceding themes, but he does so with the specific aim of helping his Catholic audience make sense of scientific discoveries in the context of their faith. Whereas there might be a temptation to view the sciences as theologically antagonistic, and to question scientific discoveries when they seem to contradict received doctrine, Newman counsels patience and a large perspective. He reminds his audience that truth cannot be contrary to truth, and that anything shown to be true must be God’s own truth and should be accepted as such: “It is the highest wisdom to accept truth of whatever kind, wherever it is clearly ascertained to be such” (348).

Newman also cautions his audience that in many circumstances, a certain truth might at first appear to contradict other truths, even if it is not so in fact. He appeals to the known truths about space and time, noting that some of these realities are beyond full human understanding. In such cases, the best policy is to be patient and to trust that truth’s internal harmony will reveal itself in time. The same consideration pertains to theological truth; what one assumes to be revealed truth may be, on closer inspection, merely one of several interpretations admitted by the underlying doctrine, and better interpretations may exist. Thus, Newman makes a strong argument for scientific researchers’ intellectual independence from religious doctrine, even if their conclusions seem at first to go against Catholic teaching; not only is theology’s interposition in science’s domain an overreach, but scientific discoveries may ultimately assist the Catholic Church’s pursuit of truth. Newman writes, “We are obliged to bear for a while with what we feel to be error, in consideration of the truth in which it is eventually to issue” (357).

This piece, delivered as a lecture to an evening university class, offers an accessible version of many of the arguments made in Newman’s “University Teaching” discourses. After opening remarks on the position and prominence of Ireland in its Catholic context, he encourages his hearers to engage not only upon the acquisition of information, but the exertion of their minds, which is the difference “between the mere diversion of the mind and its real education” (368). University lectures are not merely the impartation of knowledge from one person to another, but a genuine cooperation in intellectual exploration between the lecturer and the hearer. The goal is the transformation of minds to the point where they can not only articulate information but compare, judge, and integrate new knowledge into a broader picture. This attainment stands against two societally prevalent caricatures of intellectualism: first, people who think they know much but have never learned how to integrate that knowledge and are thus constantly spouting narrow-minded opinions; second, people who are keen-minded but have never learned real knowledge, and who find intellectual refuge in derailing others with difficult questions while never attempting to integrate the answers into a coherent whole. By contrast, a university education aims at the formation of a broad set of mental powers: “a habit of order and system, a habit of referring every accession of knowledge to what we already know, and of adjusting the one with the other” (378).

The final piece included in “University Subjects” is an address Newman delivered to the students of medicine at the Catholic University of Ireland. Newman notes that practitioners of every field have a zeal for their discipline, which, while commendable, must not be allowed to turn into exclusivism. In the case of medicine, which aims at bodily health, practitioners should keep in mind that bodily health is neither the only nor the highest end of humanity. “Man has a moral and a religious nature,” Newman says, “as well as a physical. He has a mind and a soul; and the mind and soul have a legitimate sovereignty over the body” (383). As such, medical professionals must be prepared to have their counsel overridden should spiritual counsels dictate a different course. (One example he provides is the case of a nun whose health could be improved by moving to a new location but who instead stays in the ministry to which she has devoted herself.)

Newman also recognizes, however, that moral and spiritual reality is sometimes more difficult to discern than scientific reality, as it does not lie as close to the immediate observation of our senses. Morality and religion, rather, are like “faint shadows and tracings, certain indeed, but delicate, fragile, and almost evanescent” (387). As such, Newman enjoins his audience to rely upon the guidance of the Catholic Church and to trust its teachings as a sure ground for discerning those moral and spiritual truths that bear upon their work.