The recent U.S. News and World Report rankings include a list of the best liberal arts colleges. It is a fascinating list, but not because it provides some objective measure of quality. (I would not look at the rankings for that.) Instead, it reveals who values the liberal arts. Even more, it implies an understanding of “best” that, from the definition, would prima facie exclude any Catholic colleges.
The Wealthy
There are two types of schools that make up the top “best” liberal arts colleges. The first type that dominates the list are wealthy schools. I say wealthy because their average endowment is $3.2 billion, and the students that attend these schools typically come from the upper classes. Why would those with money invest in the liberal arts? Are not the liberal arts supposed to be a waste of time, an expense with no true benefit?
In 2019, The Washington Post thought that might be the point. A liberal arts education is a luxury item, an example of conspicuous consumption. It is a sign that says, “I can spend lots of money on something useless just to show that I have money to waste.” It is an appealing explanation, confirming a bias toward the wealthy, but it is insufficient.
Even if some wealthy people are highly focused on status, not all of them are. People and schools are different. In addition, there are less risky ways to signal one’s social status. A car, a watch, clothes, all of these are safe status markers. Liberal education, on the other hand, is filled with critiques and warnings about wealth and status. It entertains ideas about justice and dignity that call into question economic disparity and profligate spending. If the wealthy want to show off, why do something that undermines the value of showing off?
I think a more reasonable explanation is that lots of those with wealth take the liberal arts seriously. The mission statement of the colleges at the top of the list speak of the liberal arts as necessary for forming leaders. They claim that the liberal arts:
· provide a broad education
· promote adaptability
· overcome narrow perspectives
· support critical thinking
· address complex, real-world problems
· foster empathy
· enable understanding of different people and cultures
· develop a sense of social responsibility
Far from the belief that the liberal arts are useless, the wealthy find in them essential skills for becoming leaders. As such, they are valuable and worth investing in.
Military Academies
The second type of schools on the list of the “best” liberal arts colleges are military academies, specifically the U.S. Naval Academy, the U.S. Air Force Academy, and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Again, if the liberal arts are useless, why would the military invest in them? When a whole nation’s security is at stake, why waste time on the liberal arts?
The military academies’ interest in the liberal arts was noted back in a 2017 essay in The Atlantic, “The Unexpected Schools Championing the Liberal Arts.” The author argues that the stakes are high in the military academies because decisions impact soldiers’ lives, national security, and international relationships. The liberal arts train people to think in complex ways. As one general was quoted,
It’s important to develop in young people the ability to think broadly, to operate in the context of other societies and become agile and adaptive thinkers . . . What you’re trying to do is teach them to deal with complexity, diversity, and change. They’re having to deal with people from other cultures. They have to think very intuitively to solve problems on the ground.
Because military leaders need to be agile, adaptive, broad, and complex thinkers, the military academies have committed to the liberal arts. Like the wealthy schools, the liberal arts are viewed as essential for developing intellectual habits that are necessary for becoming a good leader.
These two types of schools indicate the content and value of the liberal arts. The wealthy schools and the military academies focus on training people who will make decisions influencing the economy, politics, and national security. Because these roles are so important and can have such an impact on society, the liberal arts are valued and invested in. Here, then, the meaning of “best” becomes clear. These colleges become the “best” because they provide these liberal arts to those who are or will be the “top” of society.
Catholic Colleges at the “Bottom”
This definition is why Catholic colleges are not high up on the “best” list. Catholic higher education values the liberal arts but puts it in the service of those at the “bottom.” Catholic colleges and universities in the United States emerged to serve immigrants. From 1820-1870, the Catholic population increased from 200,000 to four million. In response, over 200 Catholic colleges were founded. These schools focused on the need of immigrants for money and work, equipping them to function in the U.S. economy. The colleges did more than this, though. They insisted on the liberal arts. It was the belief that there were things more important than money and that students should have an education that was more than job training.
What is this “more”? It is an education that points to the dignity of all people and builds up awareness of this dignity in those society often marginalizes. It is a sense that work should do more than earn money but also should contribute to the dignity of workers, support families, and contribute to the common good. It is an education that life should also involve time away from work, time spent with family and friends, in service of neighbor and stranger, and in prayer and worship of God. It is an education that believes that justice and truth should guide human actions and that these should be further ordered by love.
It is this “more” that Catholic higher education believes should be at the service of everyone, not only the rich and powerful but also those from the lower classes, those who are the first in their families to go to college, those who are not “typical” college students, those at the “bottom.” Catholic colleges have not done this perfectly, for sure.
Original sin, social sin, and personal sin all make perfection impossible, but Catholic higher education has not given up on this commitment to “more” for the “bottom.” They cannot do this unless they decide to turn away from Jesus who not only identifies with the least of God’s children but also judges based on how people treat these least in the kingdom. So Catholic colleges keep working to offer an education for the fullness of life for all people, including those often neglected.
I believe it is because such a commitment continues to operate in every Catholic college that graduates, across economic, ethnic, political, and religious backgrounds, report more meaningful lives, more community engagement, and stronger commitments to ethics than secular graduates.
I believe this commitment endures even though it makes the finances of Catholic higher education challenging. Serving the “bottom” is not lucrative. As a result, Catholic colleges have often been in precarious financial situations. In the mid-nineteenth century, there was a significant number of closures in Catholic higher education. Another series of closures happened in the middle of the twentieth century. Right now, we seem to be in another round of closures, with roughly five Catholic colleges closing a year since 2020. Yet, when Catholic schools try to save money by cutting the liberal arts, there is outrage. People know this touches on the essence of Catholic higher education. It is as if the school is saying that those at the “bottom” do not deserve this education, only the rich and powerful do, and that Jesus’ command to attend to God’s children does not matter.
Praying Not to Be the “Best”
The liberal arts do important work. They generate complex and agile thinking. They overcome narrow perspectives and broaden people’s capacity for attention and concern. They enable insights to help solve difficult problems and foster commitments to enact effective solutions. I am glad the wealthy value the liberal arts. I am glad the military academies value them too. It is good that the “best” liberal arts schools focus on training leaders.
I am also glad that Catholic higher education is not high on this list. It is a testament to their commitment that the liberal arts should be for everyone, not just the rich and powerful. Being able to think creatively, responding to changing circumstances, developing empathy and understanding of others, all of these are helpful not just for those at the “top” but for all people trying to live a good life. They help foster wisdom, human flourishing, and concern for neighbor and stranger. Even more than this, for those at the “bottom,” the liberal arts can generate an awareness of social forces that negatively impact people and move individuals to change them.
Thus, we should not be surprised that so few Catholic schools appear at the top of U.S. News and World Reports liberal arts rankings. The “best” schools serve the “top” of society and work to train leaders. Being a Catholic college means a commitment to God to serve all people, including those at the “bottom.” Maybe we should pray to never be the “best.”
For resources on the history of Catholic higher education that I draw on in this essay, see:
Anne Clifford, “Identity and Vision at Catholic Colleges and Universities,” Horizons 35, no. 2 (2008): 355-370.
Kenneth Garcia, Academic Freedom and the Telos of the Catholic University (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).
Matthew Garrett, “The Identity of American Catholic Higher Education: A Historical Overview,” Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry and Practice 10, no. 2 (2006): 229-247.
Jason King, “Review Essay: On Catholic Higher Education after Ex Corde Ecclesiae.” Journal of Moral Theology 4, no. 2 (2015): 167–191.
Seeking the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary through prayer