The question of whether the ‘Great Books’ curriculum represents true classical Catholic education is of great importance in contemporary educational discourse. The ‘Great Books’ approach, which emerged in the early twentieth century, seeks to form students by reading and discussing a canon of influential works from Western civilization, often in seminar-style settings. Proponents argue that this curriculum provides a broad and deep engagement with the intellectual tradition of the West. However, the rise of the ‘Great Books’ movement has coincided with a decline in traditional classical Catholic education, which was historically rooted in the study of the liberal arts, the sciences, and the doctrines of the Catholic faith, all ordered according to a well-defined hierarchy of knowledge. It is necessary to examine whether the ‘Great Books’ curriculum truly embodies the principles and aims of classical Catholic education, or whether it departs from them in significant ways.
Many educators and parents believe that the ‘Great Books’ curriculum is synonymous with classical education, especially in Catholic contexts. They argue that reading the foundational texts of Western civilization exposes students to the best that has been thought and said, and that such exposure is sufficient for intellectual and moral formation. Some claim that the seminar method, which emphasizes open discussion and critical thinking, is the most effective way to cultivate wisdom and virtue. Others maintain that the inclusion of works by Catholic authors within the ‘Great Books’ canon ensures that the curriculum is compatible with Catholic education.
However, the tradition of classical Catholic education, as articulated by St. Thomas Aquinas and the Magisterium of the Church, is not defined merely by the reading of great texts, but by the systematic study of the liberal arts, the sciences, and sacred doctrine, all ordered to the ultimate end of union with God. The Ratio Studiorum of the Jesuits, the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the decrees of the Councils of the Church all emphasize the necessity of a structured curriculum that integrates faith and reason, and that places the study of philosophy and theology above all other disciplines. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1950-1975) and the encyclical Divini Illius Magistri of Pope Pius XI further affirm that Catholic education must be ordered to the formation of the whole person in accordance with the truths of the faith.
It must be asserted that the ‘Great Books’ curriculum does not represent true classical Catholic education. First, classical Catholic education is defined by its adherence to the order of learning established by the tradition: the trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric), the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy), philosophy, and sacred theology. This order is not arbitrary, but reflects the hierarchy of knowledge and the natural development of the human intellect, as explained by Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. The ‘Great Books’ curriculum, by contrast, often presents texts from various disciplines and historical periods without regard for this order, leading to a fragmented and sometimes relativistic approach to truth.
Second, the seminar method, while valuable for discussion, cannot substitute for the systematic instruction and mastery of foundational arts and sciences that classical Catholic education requires. St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica (I, q.1, a.7), teaches that sacred doctrine is a science that proceeds from principles revealed by God, and must be taught in an ordered and authoritative manner. The ‘Great Books’ approach, which often places all texts and opinions on an equal footing, risks undermining the authority of the Church and the primacy of divine revelation.
Third, the inclusion of Catholic authors in the ‘Great Books’ canon does not guarantee that the curriculum is Catholic in its principles or aims. True Catholic education is not merely about exposure to Catholic ideas, but about the formation of the intellect and will according to the truths of the faith, as transmitted by the Magisterium and the tradition of the Church. The Council of Trent and the encyclical Aeterni Patris of Pope Leo XIII both insist on the centrality of Thomistic philosophy and theology in Catholic education, which the ‘Great Books’ curriculum does not consistently provide.
To the opinion that reading the ‘Great Books’ is sufficient for classical education, it must be replied that the tradition requires not only the reading of great texts, but the mastery of the arts and sciences in their proper order. As St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas teach, the intellect is perfected by the acquisition of habits, not merely by exposure to ideas. To the claim that the seminar method is the best means of cultivating wisdom, it must be answered that true wisdom requires authoritative teaching and the guidance of tradition, not merely open discussion. To the assertion that the inclusion of Catholic authors makes the curriculum Catholic, it must be shown that Catholic education is defined by its principles and ends, not merely by the presence of Catholic content.
In conclusion, while the ‘Great Books’ curriculum offers valuable engagement with the intellectual tradition of the West, it does not represent true classical Catholic education. The latter is defined by its adherence to the order of learning, the integration of faith and reason, and the authoritative transmission of the truths of the Catholic faith. Therefore, it must be affirmed that the ‘Great Books’ curriculum, though beneficial in some respects, does not fulfill the requirements of true classical Catholic education.
Mr. William C. Michael, O.P.
Headmaster
Classical Liberal Arts Academy
