Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: cathsurgeon on April 10, 2024, 08:40:01 AM
-
I thought of making this into a poll, but I suppose what I'm really interested to know is where a young man in today's world can go to for uncompromising Catholic formation. Open to any valid SSPX Resistance seminaries and valid (known thuc line) seminaries.
My nephew can speak French and Portuguese besides English because of school and his mum. Assuming geographical distance is not a problem, and without considering vocations (contemplative etc.), what are some options?
On top of my head, I can think of
- Most Holy Trinity Seminary (RCI)
- Mater Dei Seminary (CMRI)
- Sedes Sapientia Seminary (+Nkamuke)
- Sancta Cruz Monastery (Nova Friburgo)
- Dominicans of Avrille
- ??Can anyone remind me the place? (+Faure in France)
- The bamboo seminary (Chazal+)
My considerations at this point are only: Solid and thorough Catholic education, plentiful resources (e.g. classes won't be cancelled left and right due to lack of teachers) and good spiritual community. Just want the best in terms of education
Please advise, dear people of CathInfo! And do give reasons as well
-
SAJM – Séminaire de Morannes – SAJM – Société des apôtres de Jésus et de Marie – Séminaire de Morannes (apotresdejesusetdemarie.fr) (https://apotresdejesusetdemarie.fr/#)
SAJM (sajm-siteofficiel.blogspot.com) (https://sajm-siteofficiel.blogspot.com/)
-
https://fradesmenores.com
-
My vote is for Most Holy Trinity Seminary. The 2019 syllabus is attached, and I imagine it is still very similar in 2024.
-
My vote is for Most Holy Trinity Seminary. The 2019 syllabus is attached, and I imagine it is still very similar in 2024.
Normally I would include this, but I don't like that the seminarians are required to accept the Cassiciacuм Thesis.
My vote would be for Mater Dei Seminary (CMRI).
-
I would sent my (future) kids to Bp. Ballini. I think he's the best option in these days.
-
In my experience most people tend to attend seminaries affiliated with the communities where they attend Mass/have grown up/receive the Sacraments. Where is your nephew currently attending Mass? Does he have first hand experience with clergy from any of the above institutions?
In any case any reputable seminary would have as a condition for entry a letter of reference from a priest who knows the candidate well over a significant period of time. Typically it’s not a case of applying to multiple different seminaries from multiple different congregations at the same time.
-
In my experience most people tend to attend seminaries affiliated with the communities where they attend Mass/have grown up/receive the Sacraments. Where is your nephew currently attending Mass? Does he have first hand experience with clergy from any of the above institutions?
In any case any reputable seminary would have as a condition for entry a letter of reference from a priest who knows the candidate well over a significant period of time. Typically it’s not a case of applying to multiple different seminaries from multiple different congregations at the same time.
Very good point. This isn't like looking for a roofer where you get out the phone book and call 6 roofers, get a few quotes, and then go with the best option.
We've had many people call/e-mail our chapel here, asking about various sacraments (other than Confession/Communion) so I've dealt with this a lot myself, so I've given the topic a lot of thought.
And here's my inescapable conclusion: attending a FREE Mass isn't too much to ask, is it? Attending the chapel? (And no, putting money in the collection doesn't count as a "cost" especially since we're talking about Mass here: a Catholic has to attend Mass and support SOME chapel, right?) Why not support a chapel of the group you're looking to get involved with (seeking baptism, confirmation, marriage, seminary training, etc.)
I mean, if you'd come to Mass ONCE, you could talk to Father all about your intricate needs. And *any* group or priest is going to trust you more if you attend their public Mass, vs. a complete stranger with a phone book in his hand, who can't be bothered to attend a single 1 hour Mass at your chapel. I mean, such a contact could be ANYTHING: a researcher, an enemy, a reporter, an infiltrator, a troll, a prankster, you name it. Taking time to attend their Mass a few times shows a good-faith investment in the priest/chapel/group, and removes most of those "worst case" possibilities from consideration.
But it's like these people have a phone book mentality. They just want to USE a given congregation (company?) for a service.
A Traditional Catholic has to attend Mass somewhere, so the least you can do is go to Mass there and warm the pews a few times (gasp!) before digging deep into that Congregation for favors. That's my view on the matter, and one has to consider that a most reasonable position. What am I missing?
-
People also treat it like a job. "I'm unemployed, so I'll send resumes to 100 companies and hope to get a job at one of them."
The priesthood is not a job. The position on the Crisis isn't a non-issue like what goods/services are offered by the company that eventually hires you.
You know how they advise job seekers to learn about the company you're applying to first, so you seem more interested in that company in particular, so you don't come across as apathetic, merely looking for "a job, any job"? That's good advice for a job seeker. That is REQUIRED I believe for a seminary candidate. That's my point.
"I just want a paycheck, I don't care who it's from" is NOT how one should treat seminary formation, or even the other Sacraments. You should go somewhere based on your attachment, interest, beliefs, and loyalty to that particular position. They shouldn't all be treated as "one is as good as another". Even if they are all valid for the PUBLIC AT LARGE, that doesn't mean *YOU* shouldn't have an opinion on the matter. You're supposed to CARE, right?
What do you think about someone who shops around for a religion, but doesn't care which one? Well it's almost as bad to do this with Trad groups. Don't you actually care about the Faith? Haven't you looked into the issues *at all*, so as to form a preference or opinion about how to best deal with the Crisis? Going with a 2nd or 3rd choice, due to geographic availability, is a different matter. At least you ranked them first, based on your fervent concern for the Church and the Faith.
OR --
Compare it to looking for a spouse. Imagine being so business-like and transactional about finding a spouse. Imagine sending out 500 letters to various single women (in a database of some sort), telling them, "I'm a healthy single male of marriageable age. I am looking for a lifelong spouse with whom I can father numerous children. Until death do us part. Are you interested?"
Um...how about SOME kind of personal touch, at least pretend to be interested in the girl you're talking to in particular (rather than just her single status, her ability to bear children, etc?)
My conclusion: a vocation is MORE like finding a spouse, and LESS like finding a roofer to replace your roof.
-
P.S.
Even if YOU didn't care what congregation you studied with (and eventually served as a priest), THEY would care.
Feeding, housing, and educating a grown man for 6 years is not free. They at LEAST want you to be committed to their position TODAY, even if (they know all too well) people change and anything can happen in the future.
That's why they are REASONABLE in requiring some kind of letter of reference. They want to know they're not wasting THEIR time (and limited benefactors money) training you. Nor do they want INVITE trouble, having an known Indult seminarian come in to their Sedevacantist seminary and try to convert people, etc. Again, the seminary superiors aren't perfect and don't know everything about each student: but you MUST expect them to at least do their due diligence.
A small Trad group isn't able to train priests for the whole world. They barely have the resources to form priests for their own little group. That is reasonable.
-
The position on the Crisis isn't a non-issue like what goods/services are offered by the company that eventually hires you.
Finally someone said it, thanks. It's incredible the attitude of some people... If the don't stop being indifferent towards the Truth they will lose their souls, especially priests and wannabe seminarians who will decide whether dogmatic non-una cuм and sedeprivationism are true only after they hear what Sanborn can offer them.
-
I think the issue is this: for a layman, you can "shop around" for the best lifeboat/chapel, and possibly save your soul with several different options.
But for a PRIEST, you have to care about the Faith. YOU have to *pick* a position and preach it. You can be open to correction, you can stay within the bounds of Catholic truth and morality, and you can refrain from falsely accusing/attacking those of other positions/groups. You can also strive to get along with as many fellow priests as possible, including from other groups. But you have to have a position. You have to care.
How can a priest study the Crisis in the Church, theology, liturgy, etc. for 6 years and not end up with an opinion on how best to deal with the Crisis in the Church?
As a leader, a teacher, and a spiritual father, you HAVE to have a position you believe is best, as the basis for your apostolate.
A CHAPEL also has to have a position; it can't be a free for all, otherwise there would be chaos within the chapel. Someone has to decide what Missale will be used. Someone has to decide when Holy Saturday services will be held (Pre-1955 or the revised Holy Week). You can't have both or all of the above.
So while both sedevacantism and non-sedevacantism are valid positions, that doesn't mean a priest or chapel doesn't have to PICK ONE.
-
Send him to Padre Chazal's seminary at Hearts of Jesus & Mary Seminary in Cebu City of MCSPX. It's a great option because he can learn to become a missionary priest there and live a humble life as a simple, poor priest in the future.
-
Normally I would include this, but I don't like that the seminarians are required to accept the Cassiciacuм Thesis.
My vote would be for Mater Dei Seminary (CMRI).
They’re actually not strictly required to accept CT … though CT makes by far the most sense anyway.
-
Your choices should be narrowed down by your nephew’s view of the crisis. If he’s SV or leans that way, he wouldn’t really fit in with the Resistance options. If he’s not SV, he would not fit in with the SV options.
-
Send him to Padre Chazal's seminary at Hearts of Jesus & Mary Seminary in Cebu City of MCSPX. It's a great option because he can learn to become a missionary priest there and live a humble life as a simple, poor priest in the future.
Why is he being “sent” anywhere? He needs to make his own choice. Not everyone is suited to the missionary vocation, nor everyone to the weekend circuit life. He should decide, in consultation with a spiritual director, what suits him based on his perspective on the crisis and his temperament. Many young men have been straight-jacketed into a certain type of priestly vocation contrary to their temperament and thus been ruined by it. Bishop Sanborn is very flexible about where seminarians end up after ordination and the Resistance have a variety of options also.
-
Seminaries are an outmoded form of priestly formation. Whilst they were suitable and effective for the latter half of the second millennium, the changes in the both spiritual and temporal conditions that emerged in the 20th century have brought the Church to a new situation where priestly formation is better served by a tutorial model in which a single pupil or a small group apprenctice under a veteran priest for several years.
However, given the reality that most Catholics are still attached to the seminary model, Most Holy Trinity under Msgr. Sanborn might be the best option because of the flexibility upon ordination.
-
I would sent my (future) kids to Bp. Ballini. I think he's the best option in these days.
I'd second that, from my experience with the seminarians there, all are happy there.
-
Why is he being “sent” anywhere? He needs to make his own choice. Not everyone is suited to the missionary vocation, nor everyone to the weekend circuit life. He should decide, in consultation with a spiritual director, what suits him based on his perspective on the crisis and his temperament. Many young men have been straight-jacketed into a certain type of priestly vocation contrary to their temperament and thus been ruined by it. Bishop Sanborn is very flexible about where seminarians end up after ordination and the Resistance have a variety of options also.
I agree with much of what you said, but
Bishop Sanborn won’t allow non Cassiciacuм thinkers nor those who believe you can go to an una cuм mass into his seminary. No thanks.
-
I agree with much of what you said, but
Bishop Sanborn won’t allow non Cassiciacuм thinkers nor those who believe you can go to an una cuм mass into his seminary. No thanks.
Given Fr Cekada (RIP) was not a Cassiciacuм adherent and taught at the MHT seminary, I can't imagine this was the expectation at that time. This must be a fairly recent change.
-
I agree with much of what you said, but
Bishop Sanborn won’t allow non Cassiciacuм thinkers nor those who believe you can go to an una cuм mass into his seminary. No thanks.
Half true, half false. Those who believe una cuм Masses are permissible would not be accepted but CT is not mandatory. Bishop Sanborn said it explicitly in a video about prospective candidates for his seminary.
-
Given Fr Cekada (RIP) was not a Cassiciacuм adherent and taught at the MHT seminary, I can't imagine this was the expectation at that time. This must be a fairly recent change.
Well, the requirement for seminarians to adhere to the CT is at least since Feb. 2022 (which is after Father died). See @ minute 4:
Bishop Donald Sanborn Explains The Cassiciacuм Thesis (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQaHJz8nZyQ)
-
Half true, half false. Those who believe una cuм Masses are permissible would not be accepted but CT is not mandatory. Bishop Sanborn said it explicitly in a video about prospective candidates for his seminary.
You are wrong, see what Vermont posted above.
-
Well, the requirement for seminarians to adhere to the CT is at least since Feb. 2022 (which is after Father died). See @ minute 4:
Bishop Donald Sanborn Explains The Cassiciacuм Thesis (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQaHJz8nZyQ)
Just a clarification, if you listen at the minute 4, Bp. Sanborn is speaking of priests who are received into his Roman Catholic Institute. He requires priests who go into his Institute to adhere to the Thesis so to prevent divisions within his Institution.
Bp. Sanborn's policy regarding admission to the seminary has not changed. The Thesis is taught at the seminary, not as a dogma, but as a theological opinion. Seminarians are not required to adhere to the Thesis, but they cannot be members of the Roman Catholic Institute and they must be affiliated with an approved group in order to be ordained.
For many years, Bp. Dolan sent seminarians to MHTS to be trained and they would be ordained by Bp. Dolan. Most of the priests affiliated with SGG went to seminary at MHTS, including Bp.McGuire and Bp. Nkamuke. Fr. Cekada used to come to the seminary monthly to teach.
If you start this video at the 11:07 mark, Bp. Sanborn explains his position.
The Seminary Up-Close | Ep. 2: Questions About Admission (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ktViSMjvkc)
-
Just a clarification, if you listen at the minute 4, Bp. Sanborn is speaking of priests who are received into his Roman Catholic Institute. He requires priests who go into his Institute to adhere to the Thesis so to prevent divisions within his Institution.
Bp. Sanborn's policy regarding admission to the seminary has not changed. The Thesis is taught at the seminary, not as a dogma, but as a theological opinion. Seminarians are not required to adhere to the Thesis, but they cannot be members of the Roman Catholic Institute and they must be affiliated with an approved group in order to be ordained.
For many years, Bp. Dolan sent seminarians to MHTS to be trained and they would be ordained by Bp. Dolan. Most of the priests affiliated with SGG went to seminary at MHTS, including Bp.McGuire and Bp. Nkamuke. Fr. Cekada used to come to the seminary monthly to teach.
If you start this video at the 11:07 mark, Bp. Sanborn explains his position.
The Seminary Up-Close | Ep. 2: Questions About Admission (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ktViSMjvkc)
Before Bishop Dolan died there was a falling out between the two, if I’m not mistaken. I’m not convinced that he now limits adherence to Cassiciacuм solely to the Institute.
-
Just a clarification, if you listen at the minute 4, Bp. Sanborn is speaking of priests who are received into his Roman Catholic Institute. He requires priests who go into his Institute to adhere to the Thesis so to prevent divisions within his Institution.
Bp. Sanborn's policy regarding admission to the seminary has not changed. The Thesis is taught at the seminary, not as a dogma, but as a theological opinion. Seminarians are not required to adhere to the Thesis, but they cannot be members of the Roman Catholic Institute and they must be affiliated with an approved group in order to be ordained.
For many years, Bp. Dolan sent seminarians to MHTS to be trained and they would be ordained by Bp. Dolan. Most of the priests affiliated with SGG went to seminary at MHTS, including Bp.McGuire and Bp. Nkamuke. Fr. Cekada used to come to the seminary monthly to teach.
If you start this video at the 11:07 mark, Bp. Sanborn explains his position.
The Seminary Up-Close | Ep. 2: Questions About Admission (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ktViSMjvkc)
Ah, this seems to explain why there is confusion here. I'm happy to hear that the requirement is not for the seminarians.
Could you clarify the bolded then? If not the RCI, what are the approved groups that would allow them to be ordained?
ETA: Just watched the portion of the interview. It looks like not joining the RCI makes it harder to find approved clergy for subsequent ordination.
-
Before Bishop Dolan died there was a falling out between the two, if I’m not mistaken. I’m not convinced that he now limits adherence to Cassiciacuм solely to the Institute.
The falling out was on the part of Bp. Dolan. Bp. Sanborn had not changed any policy. Bp. Dolan decided to pull his seminarians out of MHTS, because he did not want them to be taught the Thesis.
-
The falling out was on the part of Bp. Dolan. Bp. Sanborn had not changed any policy. Bp. Dolan decided to pull his seminarians out of MHTS, because he did not want them to be taught the Thesis.
Yes, the whole affair was quite unfortunate. Sad.
-
Ah, this seems to explain why there is confusion here. I'm happy to hear that the requirement is not for the seminarians. Could you clarify the bolded then? If not the RCI, what are the approved groups that would allow them to be ordained?
Well Bp. Sanborn and Bp. Dolan and Fr. Cekada used to work very closely together. SGG held the Totalist position, but there was never any problem.
I'm not sure what groups would be approved by Bp. Sanborn and as far as I know all of the seminarians currently are intending to become members of the RCI. Bp. Sanborn mentioned Fr. Zapp and Bp. Neville. They are not members of the Institute, but Bp. Neville does hold to the Thesis, so I don't know if he would ordain someone who did not adhere to the Thesis.
-
The falling out was on the part of Bp. Dolan. Bp. Sanborn had not changed any policy. Bp. Dolan decided to pull his seminarians out of MHTS, because he did not want them to be taught the Thesis.
Is there any video or writing of his that supports his not requiring adherence for the seminary? With the lack of such evidence, it seems to me that one can assume that he does require it.
-
Is there any video or writing of his that supports his not requiring adherence for the seminary? In lieu of that evidence, it seems to me that one can assume that he does require it.
He says it in the interview with Stephen Heiner.
-
He says it in the interview with Stephen Heiner.
I stand corrected. Is it an old interview? Can you give me a link?
-
I stand corrected. Is it an old interview? Can you give me a link?
No, 2 months ago. MF posted it above.
-
Ah, this seems to explain why there is confusion here. I'm happy to hear that the requirement is not for the seminarians.
Could you clarify the bolded then? If not the RCI, what are the approved groups that would allow them to be ordained?
ETA: Just watched the portion of the interview. It looks like not joining the RCI makes it harder to find approved clergy for subsequent ordination.
I understand Bp. Sanborn's position. I do not necessarily adhere to the Thesis, but I can see how he would want continuity of belief with the priests within his Institute as to avoid any contention and a potential split as happened with Bp. Dolan
-
No, 2 months ago. MF posted it above.
I don’t see it?
-
I understand Bp. Sanborn's position. I do not necessarily adhere to the Thesis, but I can see how he would want continuity of belief with the priests within his Institute as to avoid any contention and a potential split as happened with Bp. Dolan
Yes, it's understandable; however, I think that it sounds like even though they are not required to adhere to the CT as seminarians, it does make it difficult to move towards ordination if one still doesn't adhere to it once tonsured.
-
I don’t see it?
Go to 11:07 mark.
The Seminary Up-Close | Ep. 2: Questions About Admission (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ktViSMjvkc&t=773s)
-
I don’t see it?
That's odd. It's in post #23.
-
Yes, it's understandable; however, I think that it sounds like even though they are not required to adhere to the CT as seminarians, it does make it difficult to move towards ordination if one still doesn't adhere to it once tonsured.
You also have to think about the practicality of Bishop Sanborn ordaining a totalist priest, where would +Sanborn send that priest? When Bishop Sanborn still had a good relationship with Bishop Dolan and SGG, he was more than happy to send totalist priests to SGG, but now SGG doesn't send their seminarians to MHT.
-
Yes, it's understandable; however, I think that it sounds like even though they are not required to adhere to the CT as seminarians, it does make it difficult to move towards ordination if one still doesn't adhere to it once tonsured.
Well, I'm sure all seminarians going into the seminary are aware of Bp. Sanborn's policy. I don't know what other group or bishop would be acceptable to Bp. Sanborn to ordain a priest that did not adhere to the Thesis. He mentioned Bp. Neville, but he holds to the Thesis. I believe that SGG has now started their own seminary. So, I would assume that anyone who was a committed Totalist would probably go there.
-
Go to 11:07 mark.
The Seminary Up-Close | Ep. 2: Questions About Admission (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ktViSMjvkc&t=773s)
Thanks MF and Vermont. I thought MF was referring to the video Vermont posted from 2022. I didn’t see it at first as it looked like an ad banner. :laugh1:
-
Thanks MF and Vermont. I thought MF was referring to the video Vermont posted from 2022. I didn’t see it at first as it looked like an ad banner. :laugh1:
Ha. Yeah, what's with those ad banners in the middle of a post lately?
-
Well, I'm sure all seminarians going into the seminary are aware of Bp. Sanborn's policy. I don't know what other group or bishop would be acceptable to Bp. Sanborn to ordain a priest that did not adhere to the Thesis. He mentioned Bp. Neville, but he holds to the Thesis. I believe that SGG has now started their own seminary. So, I would assume that anyone who was a committed Totalist would probably go there.
Now I wonder what it's like at the CMRI seminary since I don't think Bishop Pivarunas focuses on one or the other.
-
Now I wonder what it's like at the CMRI seminary since I don't think Bishop Pivarunas focuses on one or the other.
I presume they hold the Totalist position, but I don't know if any CMRI priest or Bp. Pivarunas has weighed in specifically on the Thesis opinion or not.
-
You also have to think about the practicality of Bishop Sanborn ordaining a totalist priest, where would +Sanborn send that priest? When Bishop Sanborn still had a good relationship with Bishop Dolan and SGG, he was more than happy to send totalist priests to SGG, but now SGG doesn't send their seminarians to MHT.
Bishop Sanborn wouldn't "send" the priest anywhere. He wants them to have some relationship with a sponsor of some kind and they can largely map out their own path after seminary. I don't think he would object if someone wanted to join up with SGG or even in some working relationship with CMRI or some independent priest somewhere.
-
Seminaries are an outmoded form of priestly formation. Whilst they were suitable and effective for the latter half of the second millennium, the changes in the both spiritual and temporal conditions that emerged in the 20th century have brought the Church to a new situation where priestly formation is better served by a tutorial model in which a single pupil or a small group apprenctice under a veteran priest for several years.
This issue came up in a previous thread, and various persons then suggested that seminaries are “outmoded” and candidates for Holy Orders should just apprentice under another priest, and one can perhaps understand the “utilitarianism” of that approach. What is not being considered is that the Church had at one time allowed that approach (the seminary or at least university model also existed then). When the “reformation” hit it was observed that a huge number of priests were very poorly formed, and as a result the laity were very poorly catechized. As just one example of poor changes that had crept in, the apostolic practice of preaching a homily on the scriptural readings of the Mass had nearly ceased. The Council of Trent devoted its Twenty-Third Session to the Sacrament of Holy Orders and the proper formation of clerics … it doesn’t seem prudent to ignore the wisdom and insight of Trent.
In the “old days” a priest would usually have at least 5 – 7 years of Latin training: Four years in minor seminary (high school) and one to three years at the collegiate level (Philosophy) before beginning his four years of theology (which at one time was mandated to be taught in Latin, I’m not sure when the change to vernacular instruction occurred). They would likely have at least two years or more of biblical Greek also. So, recalling the instance of when a Fr. Pfeiffer was “consecrated a bishop” by a Bishop Webster. Several here who watched the video of the ceremony said that Bp. Webster’s pronunciation of essential words was so bad that the consecration was invalid. In an “apprentice model” of priestly formation I can easily imagine the situation where the candidate is taught how to “read the red, say the black” without any real solid training in the language. The Canon of the Mass is said in near silence, at most “maybe” a Master of Ceremonies “might” hear, and then only at a High or Solemn Mass (I’m guessing that an apprentice model formed priest would pretty much be a “Low Mass kind of guy”). It could be possible, perhaps even too likely (given the example of Bp. Webster) that a priest could say a half century or more of invalid Masses because his poor Latin pronunciation caused the consecration to not occur. There could be a similar issue with the words of absolution during Confession.
Also, in the forum sometimes there will be a serious, and often complex, issue presented involving moral theology. The best advice given is usually “You need to talk to a traditional priest!” In the seminary model a priest receives FOUR FULL YEARS (summers off usually) of theological training. I just don’t see that happening with the apprentice model. I could see a lot of: “Fr. ****** trained under Fr. ###### and he says this. / Well, my priest trained under Fr. @@@@@@@ and he says this, so there!”