SEMINARIO

SEMINARIO. – It is the college that, according to the regulations of the Church, is intended for the spiritual and literary formation of those aspiring to the ecclesiastical state. Such a task presented itself from the earliest times, when the organization of religious communities required capable and experienced persons for the exercise of the various ministries. This responsibility fell directly upon the bishops, who, especially in the more populous and civilized cities, deemed it important to form a well-prepared clerical body, even for the benefit of smaller communities; they addressed this in many places by gathering the clergy around them in communal life or by resorting to monks, as soon as the monastic institution, during the 4th century, began to gain credit and spread.

There is evidence of this in Vercelli under Bishop St. Eusebius, in Verona, in Aquileia in the 4th century, then in Milan, and in the 5th century in Hippo under St. Augustine. Special care was resumed during the Carolingian rulers, who concerned themselves in their capitularies with the regular functioning of schools; until, with the progressive establishment of Chapters at episcopal sees, there also developed alongside it the organization of schools under the direction of a *scholasticus* or *magister*, whose importance must have been particularly significant in times and places where communal life was introduced or restored. The lack of public educational institutions made such arrangements particularly necessary; repeated conciliar decrees bear witness to this. The monasteries, especially the larger ones, faced the same necessity of establishing monastic schools for their monks; but everything depended on the greater or lesser zeal of bishops and abbots and proceeded without fixed programs, according to the particular inclinations and abilities of the teachers and students. The advancement of intellectual activities led to the establishment of particular centers of study that saw their greatest development in Paris for theology and philosophy and in Bologna for law. In Paris in particular, ecclesiastics from all over Europe flocked for their intellectual formation; but soon other cities arose to establish "general studies," and the great mendicant Orders opened schools in their convents for their friars and for ecclesiastics who wished to benefit from them. This was certainly due to the development of chapter and monastic schools, and the problem remained of forming those clerics who could not attend universities and would exercise their ministry among rural populations or urban plebeians.

For these men there were only the lower schools when these began to arise in the cities or towns, or the occasional teachers, clerics or laymen, from whom little could be expected. The special provisions issued by the Third (1179, can. 18) and Fourth Lateran Ecumenical Councils (1215, can. 11; Hefele-Leclercq, V, pp. 1101 and 1343) to provide for the instruction of the clergy soon proved insufficient, both because they were not properly applied and because of the rapid development of renewed civilization; while the university movement was not able to adequately meet the growing needs.

As for the poverty of the scholarly clergy, provision had been made at the universities with suitable scholarships or by establishing colleges where they could live in community and also have teachers; this had been done at Paris and in particular at Cambridge and Oxford; so too at Bologna did Cardinal Albornoz and at Padua Cardinal Pileo di Prata.

For scholars of their nations toward the end of the 14th century. Greater renown was earned by the College that Cardinal Domenico Capranica wished to found in his own houses in Rome in 1457 (see COLLEGI ECCLESIASTICI), and Cardinal Stefano Nardini sought to emulate it by establishing another college in 1480. The Jesuits drew much from these institutions, expanding their programs when founding their own colleges, intended to form communities of teachers (such as the Collegio Romano) or communities of students (such as the Collegio Germanico), or both together, with the principle that instruction should be free for all. These experiences were taken into account to complete, according to the most recent needs, the reforms of the Council of Trent: in the 23rd session, chapter 18 De Reform. of 15 July 1563, it was decreed that in every diocese a perpetuum Seminarium should be founded, in which the bishop could gather and religiously educate a certain number of young men destined to attend to ecclesiastical ministries. Preference was to be given to the poor, though the wealthy were not excluded; all were to live together in the same house under a rector appointed by the bishop; two special commissions were to oversee discipline and administration. To finance the new foundations, the Council imposed contributions from all ecclesiastical bodies, even exempt ones, and allowed the union of ecclesiastical benefices until the necessary revenues were reached. For teachers, recourse was to be had to those who already held benefices with attached teaching obligations; for the others, the bishop was to provide. At that time, no thought was given to the developments that seminaries would later undergo, either in the number of students or in the organization of studies; indeed, the first foundations were quite modest, both because the financial contribution encountered many difficulties and because significant legacies were not immediately available, and because opposition and contrasts could not be immediately overcome. The Pope, who had been strongly urged by the Council, opened his seminary in February 1565, entrusting it to the Jesuits; it was preceded in Milan by the nephew of St. Charles Borromeo (1564) and by some more modest foundations: Rieti, Larino, Camerino, Montepulciano. The rules drawn up for Rome and Milan were the first to govern life in the seminaries, which then arose everywhere the Tridentine reforms were applied. Those of Prague, Olmütz, Vienna, and Graz were entrusted to the Jesuits. In France, zealous bishops soon took an interest in the matter, but the religious wars immediately caused considerable damage; moreover, opposition from the Sorbonne and the Parliament of Paris was felt; instead, during the 17th century, the zeal of private priests provided for the formation of the clergy. Among these, the deacon François de Chanzy deserves mention, founder of the Petits Séminaires de la Providence for poor students, an undertaking begun in Paris in 1667 (cf. H. Trouillet, Le vén.François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, fondatore del clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, LeFrançois de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén.François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *François de Chanzy, founder of theFrançois de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, Le vén.François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the cler, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clero, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clere, Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clerFrançois de Chanzy, founder of the clergy, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*, *Le vén. François de Chanzy, founder of the clergy*

Brasile, 1892, 1894 and 1899; Polonia, 1894; Perú, 1894; Scotland, 1898; Philippine Islands, 1902; Island of Cuba, 1903). Pius X, the Pope of the interior restoration of the Church, fought for the orthodoxy of faith and ecclesiastical teaching and promoted a more intense spirituality in the life of the majority of institutes. He restored sacred chant (motu proprio Inter pastoralis, 22 Nov. 1903) and carried out the reform of the seminaries of Italy (cf. encyclical letter Pieni l'animo, 28 July 1906), issuing, through the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, a General Programme of Studies (10 May 1907; Acta Sanctae Sedis, 40 [1907], pp. 336-43) and the Norms for the educational and disciplinary organization of seminaries (18 Jan. 1908: ibid., 41 [1908], pp. 212-42), and, following the results of apostolic visitations, a series of new provisions through the Sacred Consistorial Congregation (circular letter 16 July 1912: AAS, 4 [1912], pp. 491-98). He laid down particular practical norms for the study of Sacred Scripture (apostolic letter Quoniam in re biblica, 27 March 1906) and founded the Biblical Institute in Rome. He issued disciplinary prescriptions for clerics and young priests who went to study in Rome (epistle La ristorazione, 5 May 1904), erected the new Roman Major Seminary in the place of the ancient Patriarchal See and founded regional seminaries.

Benedict XV established the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities of Studies (motu proprio Seminaria clericorum, 4 Nov. 1915) and, through the Sacred Congregation, issued the Ordinamento dei seminari (26 Apr. 1920), in which the spirit of St Charles lived on.

The first solemn act of Pius XI was the programmatic letter Officiorum omnium (1 Aug. 1922: to Cardinal Gaetano Bisleti, prefect of the Sacred Congregation) on the importance of seminaries and the dignity of studies: he declared the Work of Vocations indispensable, Latin the “Catholic language” linked to the cause of religion, the minor seminary reserved exclusively for candidates for the priesthood (“Haec esto seminariorum omnium, nullo excepto, sanctissima lex”), and the regional seminary as the major seminary proper to each diocese. This document was matched by the analogous letter Unigenitus to religious superiors (19 March 1924): the ratio studiorum of the seminaries was to be followed also in the formation houses of religious destined for the priesthood. He proclaimed St Thomas the guide of studies (29 June 1923); with the apostolic constitution Deus scientiarum Dominus (q.v.), he gave new structure to the higher studies of the clergy. He instituted the Day for the Support of Oriental Christianity; ordered the triennial report to the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and the scrutiny of candidates for ordination (Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, 27 Dec. 1930); issued provisions for the proper preservation of archives. In paternal remembrance of his priestly jubilee he gave the Church the encyclical on the priesthood (Ad catholici Sacerdotii, 20 Dec. 1935), rich in precious norms for the formation of the clergy.

Finally, the reigning Pontiff Pius XII, following in the footsteps of his predecessors, established the Pontifical Work for Priestly Vocations (motu proprio *Cum Nobis*, 4 Nov. 1941: AAS, 33 [1941], p. 479) and ratified the related statutes (8 Sept. 1943: AAS, 35 [1943], pp. 369–73); he marked the paths of truth in scientific research, summoning scholars to confront the doctrinal deviations of our time (encyclical *Humani generis*, 12 Aug. 1950: AAS, 42 [1950], pp. 561–78), and formulated the criteria for sound modern ecclesiastical pedagogy in the apostolic exhortation *Menti Nostrae* (23 Sept. 1950; ibid., pp. 657–702), which places the seal and crown upon the entire centuries-old legislation of the Church regarding seminaries.

Current Organization. — I. The most important event for the development of seminaries after the Council of Trent was the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law. In Book III, an entire title (cc. 1352–71) is devoted to them. Moreover, many other canons concern ecclesiastical life and those to be ordained.

a) By asserting the Church’s “proper and exclusive” right to educate its ministers (cc. 1352), the Code first treats the establishment of seminaries (cc. 1353–56), recalling the duty of priests—especially the parish priest—to cultivate in children of good disposition the seed of a divine vocation, and the obligation of bishops to provide their diocese with its own seminary, preferably divided into a minor seminary (for literary studies) and a major seminary (for philosophical and theological studies). If the smallness or poverty of the diocese makes a proper seminary—especially a major one—impracticable, the students shall be sent to another seminary chosen by the bishop, unless the Holy See has erected an interdiocesan or regional seminary for the relevant territory. Every seminary must have its own revenues; in their absence, the bishop shall meet the needs in various ways: through collections, the “seminaristic tax” (v. SEMINARISTICO [v.]), and the assignment of simple benefices to the seminary.

b) The persons assigned to the operation of the seminary (cc. 1357–61) are: the rector (rector pro disciplina), the bursar, the professors, the spiritual director (director spiritus), and at least two ordinary confessors, to whom other extraordinary confessors must be added for the greater freedom of the students. A general principle is the clear distinction between the internal and external forum. The rector, whom St. Charles calls *omnium primus*, bears responsibility for the entire conduct of the seminary but must not serve as bursar nor may he be a confessor (cc. 1358 and 891); he is generally assisted by one or more vice-rectors (v. RETTORE).

c) For each seminary there must be “deputies, priests chosen by the bishop after having heard the Chapter, who supervise discipline and administration respectively. Their office lasts six years and they may be re-elected. Excluded from this office, besides the rector and the bursar, are the vicar general, the bishop’s household members, and the ordinary confessors. Their opinion has consultative value, though the bishop is bound to seek it in matters of greater importance (cc. 1359).

d) The students must be legitimate sons and must aspire to the priesthood (cc. 1363), entering the seminary at the beginning of their secondary studies (cc. 972 and 1370). They must be educated in piety, study, and the exercise of Christian virtues; they must observe rules of decorum and hygiene, as well as ecclesiastical gravity (cc. 1367–69). The incorrigible, those who fail in their studies, and all who lack inclination toward sacred matters must be dismissed (c. 1371). Those dismissed from other seminaries or from religious institutes may not be accepted without due precautions (cc. 1363 and 1373), and in every case without the “nulla osta” of the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries. The curriculum includes the humanistic or literary course, which generally corresponds to that of state schools but with particular emphasis on classical letters, Latin and Greek; the two-year philosophical cycle and the four-year theological cycle. The principal subjects in the major seminary are scholastic philosophy, dogmatic and moral theology, Sacred Scripture, ecclesiastical history, canon law, liturgy, and patrology. There are also numerous secondary disciplines: archaeology, ascetics and mysticism, rhetoric, pastoral theology, sacred music, etc. The professors should preferably be university graduates. They are obliged to teach philosophy and theology according to the method, doctrine, and principles of St Thomas Aquinas (cc. 1364–66).

e) By virtue of its own juridical personality, the seminary—while remaining subject to the bishop’s authority—is exempt from parochial jurisdiction; the rector himself acts as parish priest (c. 1368).

It is the bishop’s responsibility to ensure the good order of the seminary, and he is bound to inform himself personally about its condition (c. 1357). He therefore exercises high oversight, while the juridical representation, which post-Tridentine jurisprudence already recognized as belonging to the bishop, now pertains to the rector, who in case of absence or impediment is replaced by the bishop.

2. The practical application of these norms varies somewhat from country to country. In Italy the two-year philosophical cycle is merged with the three-year lyceum course; it has now become customary, however, to add a fourth year especially devoted to the study of philosophy. In the North and in Sicily the full seminary (minor and major united) is generally maintained; in other regions there are diocesan seminaries for the gymnasium and regional seminaries for the lyceum-philosophical and theological courses.

3. I s. regionali d'Italia debbono la loro istituzione a Pio X, il quale ne redasse, con la cost. apost. Susceptum inde del 25 marzo 1914, la carta costituzionale (AAS, 6 [1914], pp. 213-18), con il fine di venire incontro alle necessità delle numerose piccole diocesi, onde dare ad esse un clero debitamente formato. Dipendono direttamente dalla S. Congregazione dei S. e delle Università degli Studi, che ne nomina il personale e provvede alla loro economia. I vescovi delle rispettive diocesi vi esercitano la loro alta

Vocations and formation etc.: M. Bargillat, De institutione clericorum in seminariis episcopalibus, Paris 1908; Card. D. Mercier, De s. seminariis, Malines 1908; J. Bricout, L'éducation du clergé français, Paris 1922; Fr. Mennini, I Santi Ordini, Turin 1925; P. Ruiz de los Paños, El Reglamento del s. como medio de santificación, Toledo 1927; G. M. Camele, La formazione del clero: teoria e pratica, Bologna 1929 (2nd ed., edited by C. Sarti, Milan 1949); A. Ciarappa, Sacerdos, Todi 1929 (with particular regard to the Opera delle Vocazioni); Card. D. Jorio, Sacerdos alter Christus, Rome 1933 (commentary on the Instruction on the scrutiny of ordinands); W. Onclin, De rectoribus seminariorum, in Ius