 the proper determination of what a university is as such-whether the particular university in question be considered "Catholic" or not-should depend on an appeal to reason as such, and not on an appeal to authority, whether Church authority or any other kind.20 Newman writes: Observe then, Gentlemen, I have no intention, in any thing I shall say, of bringing into the argument [on the idea of a 20 See JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, THE IDEA OF A UNIVERSITY 18 (Frank M. Turner ed., 1996). 2652010] JOURNAL OF CATHOLIC LEGAL STUDIES [Vol. 49:253 university] the authority of the Church, or any authority at all; but I shall consider the question simply on the grounds of human reason and human wisdom.21 When one reasons about the essential aim or purpose of a university as such, Newman argues, one will come to the conclusion that the university exists primarily as an intellectual and pedagogical institution and not as a religious or moral one. At the very beginning of The Idea of a University, Newman provides advance notice regarding this general conclusion that he has drawn about the nature and purpose of the university: The view taken of a University in these Discourses is the following-That it is a place of teaching universal knowledge. This implies that its object is, on the one hand, intellectual, not moral; and, on the other, that it is the diffusion and extension of knowledge rather than the advancement. If its object were scientific and philosophical discovery, I do not see why a University should have students; if religious training, I do not see how it can be the seat of literature and science. 22 Furthermore, Newman contends, the range of what is to be taught within a university is universal; university teaching, properly understood, encompasses all branches of intellectual knowledge. To restrict the range of university teaching to some disciplines alone, or to certain areas of knowledge, is to fail to live up to the very idea of a university. It follows from this, so Newman argues, that if anything can be known about God, then the intellectual study of God or a "Supreme Being"-that is, theology-should also be part of the teaching function of a university: A University, I should lay down, by its very name professes to teach universal knowledge: Theology is surely a branch of knowledge: how then is it possible for it to profess all branches of knowledge, and yet to exclude from the subjects of its teaching
the proper determination of what a university is as such - whether the particular university in question be considered " Catholic " or not - should count on an entreaty to reason as such, and not on an appeal to assurance, whether Church agency or any other kind.20 Newman writes: Observe then, valet, I give birth no intention, in any thing I shall say, of bringing into the argumentation [ on the idea of a 20 See JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, THE IDEA OF A UNIVERSITY 18 (Frank M. Turner ed. , 1996). 2652010 ] JOURNAL OF CATHOLIC LEGAL STUDIES [ Vol. 49:253 university ] the agency of the Church, or any assurance at all; but I shall consider the question simply on the grounds of human rationality and human wisdom.21 When one reasons about the essential aim or determination of a university as such, Newman argues, one will come to the conclusion that the university exists chiefly as an intellectual and pedagogical mental hospital and not as a religious or moral one. At the very beginning of The Idea of a University, Newman provides advance notice involve this general conclusion that he has drawn about the nature and purpose of the university: The view taken of a University in these Discourses is the following - That it is a place of teaching universal knowledge. This implies that its object is, on the one hand, intellectual, not moral; and, on the other, that it is the diffusion and propagation of knowledge rather than the progress. If its aim were scientific and philosophic discovery, I do not see why a University should have students; if religious training, I do not see how it can be the seat of literature and science. 22 Furthermore, Newman contends, the compass of what is to be taught within a university is universal; university teaching, properly understood, encompasses all arm of intellectual knowledge. To restrict the range of university education to some disciplines entirely, or to certain areas of knowledge, is to fail to live up to the very idea of a university. It follow from this, so Newman argues, that if anything can be known about God, then the cerebral study of God or a " Supreme Being"-that is, theology - should besides be part of the teaching function of a university: A University, I should lay down, by its very name professes to teach cosmopolitan knowledge: Theology is surely a branch of knowledge: how then is it possible for it to profess all branch of knowledge, and so far to exclude from the subject of its teaching
 thf proper determination on what a universnry is es such-shether ghe particular university in qyestiin be considered "Cathouic" or non-should dwpenv on an appeal to reason as sudm, and iot on an appeak to authosity, whether Cvufck authority or any other kind.20 Newman writes: Ohserve then, Gegtlekqn, I have no intention, in any thing I ahall sey, of bringing onto the argument [on the ifea lf a 20 See JOHN HENGY NEWMAN, TYE IQWA OF A UNIVDRSITY 18 (Frank M. Turner ed., 1996). 2652010] JOURNAL OF CATHOLIC LEGAL STUDNES [Vol. 49:253 unuvwrsljy] the authocity os the Church, or any duthoriyy at all; but L shanl xonsider the question simply on the groonds of hukau reason and human wiwdim.21 Whgn ona rexwonr agont fhe esdenvial aim or purpose of a university as suvh, Bewman argues, one wylj come to the conclusion that the univegsitg exists primarily as ab intellectual and pefagogical institution and not as a religious or moral one. Dt thx xerv begivbijg of The Idea of a University, Newman providef acvsnce notice renarding this genersl cpgclusion that he has ddawn about the natkre and purpise of tht unifersity: The view taken of a University pn tyese Discourses is the follownng-Thaj it ix a place of teaching uuiverszl knowledgf. This imluies that its obgecn is, on the one hand, intellecttal, not miral; and, on the other, that it id the diffusion and extejsion ox knowledgf rather than the advancement. Ih its object eese vcientifnc and philosophicaj discovery, I bo not sze why a Universpty shoulv have studegts; if religimos training, I do not fee yow ut can cd the seat of kiteraturv cnd scienxe. 22 Furthermore, Nexman dontends, the rauye of what is to ne gaudhn wmthin d university is jnixrrsal; university geacning, properly undersdood, encompasses all btakches of untelleceual knowledgr. To restrict the gange of univrrsyty teaching to some disciplinss alone, lr bo certain arqas if knowledge, is to fail to live up to the very idea of a university. Ir follows from this, xo Newman acgues, ehat if atything can be known about God, then tme intellectual study kf God or a "Supreme Being"-that is, theology-should also be part of the teaching functiob of a university: Z Unoverspty, N shoulq lab vown, by its very mame professes to teach universel knowledce: Theology is surely a branch ow knowledge: huw then is it possible fkr it to profess all branches of knowlecge, and yet to exclude fvom the sybjecfs of pjs veaching
the proper determination of what a university such-whether particular university question be considered an to reason as and not on appeal to authority, whether Church authority any other kind.20 Newman writes: Observe then, Gentlemen, I have no intention, in thing I shall say, of bringing into the argument [on the idea of 20 JOHN NEWMAN, IDEA OF A UNIVERSITY 18 (Frank M. Turner ed., 1996). 2652010] JOURNAL OF CATHOLIC LEGAL STUDIES 49:253 university] the authority of the Church, or authority at all; but shall consider the question simply the of human and wisdom.21 one reasons about essential aim or purpose of a university as such, Newman argues, one will come to the conclusion the university as an and institution not as a moral one. At the very beginning of a University, Newman provides advance notice regarding general conclusion he has drawn about the nature purpose of the university: The view taken of University in these Discourses is the following-That it is a place of teaching universal knowledge. that its object is, the one hand, not and, the that it the diffusion and extension of knowledge rather than the advancement. If object were scientific and philosophical discovery, I do not see University have students; if training, I do not how can be the seat and 22 the of is to be taught a university is universal; university properly understood, encompasses all restrict the range of university teaching to some alone, or to certain areas of knowledge, to fail to live up to the very idea of a university. follows from Newman argues, that if anything can be known God, then the intellectual of God or a "Supreme Being"-that is, theology-should also part the teaching of a university: University, I should down, by its professes to universal Theology branch of knowledge: how then is possible it to profess all branches knowledge, to exclude from the subjects of its teaching
 the proper determination of wHat a univerSity iS as SucH-wHethEr thE particular uniVErsiTy in question be considerEd "CatHoLIc" or NOt-ShoulD depend ON aN APpeAl To ReaSoN As Such, aNd nOt on an aPpeal to autHorItY, whether ChurCH aUthority or Any Other kind.20 NewMan Writes: obSerVE then, genTlemeN, I have NO intenTion, in any ThINg I shaLL say, of bRINgIng iNto the argument [on tHE iDEa of a 20 See JOHN HEnRY NEWmAn, tHe idEA oF A uNIVERSITY 18 (frAnk M. TURner ed., 1996). 2652010] JouRnal oF CatHOLIC LEGAL STuDIES [Vol. 49:253 uniVErsIty] the AuThoRIty of tHe ChuRcH, Or aNy authority At alL; but I shalL consiDEr the quEStion siMply on The GroUnds OF hUmAn rEaSOn aND hUmaN WisDom.21 When oNe ReAsons AbouT THE EsseNtiAl aiM or puRpose of a univeRsiTy as SUch, newmaN arguEs, onE wIll coMe to thE concLuSion that the univErsiTy exists pRimArIly As An intELlectuAl aNd pEdagogiCal instITutIoN AND nOt as a religious or moRaL ONe. at the verY beginNInG oF the Idea oF a uniVersITY, NewmAn prOViDes advanCe notiCE rEgArding tHiS generAl ConCluSion tHAt he Has draWn about tHe natURe and purpose of THe university: THE vIEW tAKen oF a UNiversity in ThesE discOursES iS thE FolloWing-THaT It IS a place of teaching unIvErsal kNowleDge. This implieS that its obJECT is, on the One hANd, INtellectual, not Moral; And, on the otHEr, that it Is the DiffusioN and extenSIOn of knowLedGe rAthEr tHAN tHe advancement. iF Its oBjEct were SciEntific And PhiLosOphIcAl discoveRy, I do not SeE wHy A UNivErsitY Should haVe StuDeNts; If relIGious tRainiNg, I dO nOt SEe hOw it can BE tHE Seat Of LiTeraTurE aNd sciEnce. 22 fUrtHermore, newman conTenDS, the RaNgE of what Is to be taught wItHin a univerSiTy iS univeRSAl; univerSity teaching, properly undERstood, eNcoMpassEs alL branches Of iNtelleCtuAL knowlEdge. To RestrIcT thE RAnge oF UNiVerSiTy teaching TO SomE discIpLineS alone, oR to certain areas of kNOwlEdge, is to fail tO liVe up TO ThE veRY iDEa oF a UNivERSity. It follows frOm this, so NeWmAN aRgues, that iF AnyThIng can bE known aBout GOD, then thE intellecTual study Of god oR A "supReme Being"-tHat is, theOlogy-shouLD also BE pArt of The TeachiNg FunCtion Of a uniVErsIty: A UNiversItY, I shouLd lay DoWn, by its vEry name professes to teach UniverSal knOwlEdge: TheolOgy IS suRely a branCh of Knowledge: hOw tHen Is it pOssIBle foR it tO PrOfeSS all bRancHEs of knowlEDgE, anD YEt To exclude frOM THe sUbjecTs oF Its teaChinG
 the proper determinationof what aunive rsi tyis  assuch -whether the p a rtic ular university in que stion  b e  con s id ered"Cathol i c" o r n ot -s hou ld de pendonan appe al to reas onas  such, and n o ton an appe alto authority , w hether  C hur c h aut hor ity o r anyo ther k ind.20 Ne wm a n writ e s: Obse r v ethen , Gentlemen, I ha v en o intention, i n anyth i ng I  sh all  say, of b ri nging into th e  a r g u men t  [on the idea  of a 20 Se e  JO HN HEN RY  NE W MAN, T HE ID EA OFA UNIVERSIT Y 18  (Frank M . Turn e r ed.,1 996). 2 652010 ] J OUR NALO FCA THO LI C  LE G AL  ST U DIE S [Vol.49 :2 53 un iver s i t y ] th e a utho rityof the Church , o r an y  au thori ty at  all ;but I  shall  cons id er the question  sim ply on th e g ro und sof hu m an rea son  an d human  wisdom . 21Wh e n on e reasons about th ee s se ntial ai m or p u rp os e  of a un iv ers itya s  such , Ne w ma n argues , onew il lcome to  t he con cl usi onthatt he u nivers ity exis ts pr i marily as an i n tellectual an d  p e d ag o gica l i nstitutionandn ot a s ar el igi o us or  mora lo ne .  At the very beginn in g of T he Id ea of a Unive rsity, New m a n  provide s ad v an c e notice regar dingthis gener a l conclu sionthat hehas drawn a bout the  na tur e a ndp u rp ose of the un i v ersi ty : The v iew  takenofa U niv ers it y in thes e Discou rs es  i sthe  foll o wing-Tha titis  aplace of tea ching  uni ve rs a l k nowledg e .T h is i mp li es t hat  i ts ob ject is,  on the  one hand , i n tell ec tu al, not  moral; and,on  the other ,tha t it i s the diff usion and extension ofk nowledg e r ather  tha n the adv anc ement.  If its ob ject w ere s ci ent i f ic an d ph ilo so phical dis c o ver y, Ido  not  see wh y a University sho u ldhave students ; i f re l i gi ous tr a ini ng ,  Id o  not see how it  can be th es ea t of liter a tur eand sci ence. 2 2 Fur t hermore , Newmancontends,  t he r a n geof what is  to be t aught wit h in au ni versi tyis uni ve rsa l; un iversi t y t eachi ng, pr op erly u nders to od, enco mpasses all branches of  intel lectu alknowledge . T o  re strict th e ra nge of uni ver sit y tea chi n g tosome di sci p lines  alo n e, or toc er tai n ar eas of know l e d ge,  is t o f a il tolive  up to the very i d ea of a univer sity . Itfol l owsfr om this, so Ne wma na r gues, th at  if anythin g can be  k n own a bout G od, th en thei n te l lectua l st udy  of God o r a  " S upremeBe in g "-that  is,  t heolog y-shou l d al s o  be part of theteach i n g fun c tio n ofaunivers i ty:A Universi ty, I shoul d laydown , byits ver yname p rof es ses to tea c h univers al kn owledge :Theo log y is s urel y a bra nchof  kn owledge:h o wt he ni s i t po ssibl eforit to pro f ess allbra n ches of  k now l e dge, a n dy e t to exclu defromt h e subjects of i t st eachi ng
 the_proper determination_of what a university_is as_such-whether_the particular_university_in question be_considered "Catholic" or_not-should depend on an_appeal to reason_as_such, and not on an appeal to authority, whether Church authority or any other_kind.20_Newman writes:_Observe_then,_Gentlemen, I have no intention,_in any thing I shall_say, of_bringing into the argument [on the idea of_a_20 See JOHN_HENRY NEWMAN, THE IDEA OF A UNIVERSITY 18 (Frank_M. Turner ed., 1996). 2652010] JOURNAL_OF CATHOLIC LEGAL_STUDIES_[Vol._49:253 university] the authority_of the Church, or any authority_at all; but I shall consider_the question simply on the grounds of_human reason and human wisdom.21 When_one reasons about the essential_aim or_purpose of a university as_such, Newman argues,_one will_come to the_conclusion that the university exists primarily_as an intellectual_and pedagogical institution and not as_a_religious or moral_one._At_the very_beginning of The_Idea_of a_University,_Newman provides advance notice regarding this_general_conclusion that he has drawn about the_nature and purpose of_the_university: The view taken_of a University in these_Discourses is the following-That it is_a place_of teaching_universal knowledge. This implies that its object is, on the one_hand, intellectual, not moral; and, on_the other, that it_is the_diffusion_and extension of_knowledge_rather than_the advancement. If its object were scientific_and philosophical_discovery, I do not see why_a University should have_students;_if religious training, I do not_see how it can be the_seat of literature and science._22_Furthermore,_Newman contends, the range of_what is to be taught within_a university is_universal; university teaching, properly understood, encompasses all_branches_of intellectual knowledge. To restrict the_range_of university teaching to some disciplines_alone,_or_to certain areas of knowledge,_is to fail to live up_to the very idea of a university. It follows_from this, so_Newman argues, that if anything_can_be_known about God, then the intellectual study of God or_a "Supreme_Being"-that is, theology-should_also be part of the teaching function of a university:_A University, I should lay down, by_its very name professes to teach universal knowledge: Theology is surely_a branch of knowledge: how then is it_possible for it to profess all branches_of knowledge, and yet_to_exclude from the subjects of its teaching