Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: New seminary in Boston, KY  (Read 7940 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

New seminary in Boston, KY
« on: June 04, 2013, 12:27:37 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson


Seems reproduction without any seminarians will remain an issue.

Nobody has a vocation to an independent apostolate other than a hermit.


I talked to Father Pfeiffer on the phone just the other day. (It's the second time in my life - so don't get the impression that I'm Father's mouthpiece!) He has definite plans for founding a seminary this academic year.

He's still working on rounding up the faculty for the seminary (as well as for the projected school). He said that some classes (plural) will be given via Skype, since one or more professors will have permanent apostolates elsewhere than in Boston, KY. He said that in the old days Society schools often didn't have all the teachers lined up until a day or two before the start of classes, and that it would probably be the same in Boston this coming academic year.

About fifteen young men are interested in coming to the Boston, KY, seminary. Most of them are from out of the country, and it will take them a while to get visas. (I didn't ask what country, and he didn't say. I heard from someone else that there are some from the Philippines.) As a result, Father Pfeiffer thinks that a good estimate of the number of seminarians for this coming October is five. (I am not sure why, but he's planning to start in October this year rather than September.)

Father Pfeiffer says that he will need someone to teach the seminarians English grammar, as well as make sure they're up to speed in "reading, writing, and arithmetic" (Father Pfeiffer's words). Also, he told me that he's looking for someone to teach Latin.

The reason that I've been talking to him and Father Hewko about the seminary and school projects is that I was considering teaching there. Recently, however, I concluded that I will be unable to do that for the moment.

The point is that Father Pfeiffer is not automatically excluding laymen as professors of Latin, English (as a second language), and math. So if you know anyone who would be qualified, don't hesitate to put them in contact with Father.

And don't forget about the school. They'll also need lay teachers to get the school going. Here's an old discussion about the school project: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Resistance-boarding-school

God bless all volunteers!

In amore Veritatis,

Sean Govan

New seminary in Boston, KY
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2013, 02:31:04 PM »
Wow, that's a lot of work for Father Pfeiffer. I hope he is up to it and gets all the support he needs.


New seminary in Boston, KY
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2013, 03:04:09 PM »
Not a good idea filling the seminary up with Third World candidates. They will suddenly discover they have a vocation, go through the motions of learning Latin or whatever .... and then scarper in due course to hide among the general population.

New seminary in Boston, KY
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2013, 03:05:10 PM »
Fri Pfeiffer has galvanised the resistance... Deo Gratias,  he is deserving of our support, even if we cannot keep up with him...

New seminary in Boston, KY
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2013, 04:06:14 PM »
Quote from: Wessex
Not a good idea filling the seminary up with Third World candidates. They will suddenly discover they have a vocation, go through the motions of learning Latin or whatever .... and then scarper in due course to hide among the general population.


 :confused1:

I don't understand your explanation of why it's not a good idea.

If they come to his seminary and discover that they do indeed have a vocation, then why would they be any more likely to leave and "hide among the general population" than anyone else who comes to the seminary and "suddenly discover(s) they have a vocation"?

Or maybe you meant to write "discover they don't have a vocation..."? Or "discover they have a vocation to the married state..."?

I'm confused.