Non-accredited schools that are seeking accreditation always highlight this fact and what it means for students who start before accreditation is award. This school does not, so it almost certainly is not seeking accreditation, and since it's degree program is pretty overtly not a traditional academic degree program (not even in theology), but a religio-political indoctrination program designed to create warriors for a particular political viewpoint on behalf of a theocratic faction within Catholicism, I doubt it would have much chance at accreditation if it sought it.

> its degree program is pretty overtly not a traditional academic degree program (not even in theology), but a religio-political indoctrination program designed to create warriors for a particular political viewpoint on behalf of a theocratic faction within Catholicism

Do these bits:

  The college aims at a revived citizen class of educated workers who can hold the powerful forces of our society to account"

and

  The American separation of religion from public life [...] is an error[...]. This error must be overcome

form the basis of your conclusion?

For what it's worth, I recoiled from the sentiment 'dragonwriter expressed, but I did some digging and I think they're more right than wrong about this. It's unfortunate, because creative alternative credentials and trade-focused education are interesting and valuable discussions to have. But I don't think this particular organization is likely to be operating in good faith.

No, those excepts alone are not the whole basis. Why?

Arguably a lot of pre-existing, accredited institutions are now pretty overtly not a traditional degree program (not even in say, English, or History) but a religio-political indoctrination program designed to create warriors for a particular political viewpoint of a theocratic faction…

In the US, institutional accreditation is almost never retroactive.