ÉÙÅ®¸£Àû

This post is part of a series: Applying the Principles of Catholic Social Justice to Contemporary Issues.

One of the clearest tests of academic freedom and conscience in Catholic higher education comes in a very practical form: may a Catholic college require students to take courses in Christianity, theology, or Catholicism? In a pluralistic institution, especially one that welcomes students from many religious backgrounds or from none, the question can sound uneasy from the start. Does such a requirement impose religion? Does it conflict with conscience? Or is it simply part of the educational identity of the institution?

Catholic teaching begins from the claim that a Catholic university really is different in kind, not merely in historical ancestry. Pope John Paul II in Ex Corde Ecclesiae describes a Catholic university as born from the heart of the Church and says that Catholic teaching is to inform university life and activity (1990, Part I:  Identity and Mission, no. 13; Part II:  General Norms, Art. 2, §4). In Gravissimum Educationis, Pope Paul IV notes that in Catholic institutions, academic disciplines should be pursued according to their own proper principles, while faith and reason are brought into deeper harmony (1965, no. 10). These texts do not suggest that Catholic institutions should hide or soften their religious character to appear neutral. They suggest the opposite. A Catholic college should be sufficiently confident in its mission to ensure that students encounter the tradition that animates the institution.

At Saint Michael’s, that means the requirement of religious studies or Catholic Intellectual Tradition-related coursework should not be seen as an accidental remnant of the past. It belongs to the identity of the College as a Catholic liberal arts institution. Students are not merely training for a profession. They are being invited into larger questions about God, human dignity, justice, meaning, history, tradition, and the shape of a good life. A college that bears Catholic identity but no longer asks students to engage Catholic or Christian thought in a sustained way would risk thinning that identity into atmosphere rather than education.

But there is an equally important limit. Catholic teaching on religious freedom does not allow the educational mission of the institution to become a form of religious compulsion. In Dignitatis Humanae,  Pope Paul VI teaches that persons are not to be forced to act against conscience in religious matters (1965, no. 2). The distinction this implies is decisive: a Catholic college may require the study of Christianity or Catholicism, but it may not require assent to Christianity or Catholicism. To ask a student to understand the Nicene Creed is not the same as asking the student to recite it as personal belief. To ask a student to analyze Catholic social teaching is not the same as demanding ideological compliance. To require serious engagement is part of liberal education. To require inward agreement would be coercive.

This distinction is often overlooked because contemporary culture tends to treat exposure and endorsement as though they were the same thing. They are not. Education requires exposure, examination, and argument. It asks students to enter worlds they do not yet inhabit. A Catholic institution should expect students to read Scripture, Augustine, Aquinas, Catholic social encyclicals, and modern theological voices. It should expect them to argue carefully, write responsibly, and demonstrate understanding. What it should not do is collapse academic assessment into spiritual declaration.

The themes of Catholic Social Teaching clarify why this matters. The dignity of the human person requires that conscience be respected. The Catholic social justice principle of rights and responsibilities means that students who freely enroll at a Catholic college undertake real academic obligations, including engagement with its tradition. Participation means they join a community with a distinctive mission, not a generic marketplace of options. The common good means the institution itself has an obligation to preserve the substance of its curriculum and not surrender its identity to the logic of consumer preference. (USCCB, Seven Themes of Catholic Social Teaching).

For Saint Michael’s, then, the question is not whether required courses in religious studies violate conscience. The better question is how such requirements are framed and taught. If they are presented as invitations to serious inquiry, rooted in the College’s Catholic mission, and if students are evaluated on understanding rather than assent, then the requirement is not a violation of conscience. It is an expression of educational integrity. A Catholic college should not apologize for asking students to study Catholicism. It should simply make clear that academic engagement is not the same as compelled belief. That clarity protects both mission and freedom.

If you would like to make a comment or ask a question, I can be reached at dtheroux@smcvt.edu.  Let’s talk!