Is Latin still taught at seminary?

[Bithynian]

Do all seminarians study Greek and Hebrew now, or only those specifically going for advanced degrees?

It varies. Most seminaries will require, at minimum, one or two years of basic instruction in Greek as it’s an important skill for Scriptural exegesis. Hebrew is generally optional.

Most seminarians will graduate only with a basic grasp of Greek, and many tend to lose their beginner’s fluency within a few years. It’s a ‘use it or lose it’ sort of deal: maintaining and developing fluency requires many years of consistent, self-directed learning after formal study. This is very difficult outside of academic environments.

 

[Jbrady]

Do all seminarians study Greek and Hebrew now, or only those specifically going for advanced degrees?

Only those who are going to use it in their future careers, generally in scriptural studies or religious history. Some seminaries may give a brief overview of Greek, and an even briefer overview of Hebrew. Nothing too involved, though.

 

[Jbrady]

maintaining and developing fluency requires many years of consistent, self-directed learning after formal study. This is very difficult outside of academic environments.

It seems like many of the advocates of teaching ancient languages in seminaries have no concept of the time required to learn a language to the point where it is useful. And, as you pointed out, the amount of time and effort to keep the fire burning.

 

[phil19034]

Latin would be rare. More likely Greek and Hebrew.

Latin is required by Canon Law & by the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops.

The fifth addition of the Program of Priestly The fifth addition of the Program of Priestly Formation (PPF) of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) specifies that a man… [before being accepted to theological Seminary] has a basis in Latin and Greek in addition to Spanish (6 hours of Latin, 6 hours of Greek, 6 hours of Spanish).

How many priests remember it is a different story.

Also, depends on what level they are at.

St Charles Borromeo Seminary (for example) seminarians in college seminary (working on their BA) are required to take 4 semesters of Latin, 3 semesters of Greek, and 2 semesters of Spanish.

While seminarians who enter St Charles Borromeo Seminary already with a college degree and start in the “pre-theology” program take 2 semesters each of Latin, Greek, and Spanish.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

Seminary is a Master’s program. The courses you mention would be found in the core classes for an undergraduate degree.

 

[AlbMagno]

From what I’ve heard, seminarians in my city learn a mandatory mixture of Latin, Greek, and another modern language (French or English).

I remember a seminarian saying how the Greek classes were more useful to him than the Latin ones…

 

[goout]

You seem to act like learning Latin is some big daunting task, and that learning, say Spanish, isn’t? It’s the language of Holy Mother Church. I would say it probably is a pretty good and valuable thing for a priest to learn latin, and probably happens more than one would think.

In the US, Spanish is the emerging language of the future. Our last 3 new priests knew Spanish, and could say the Mass in Spanish as well as speak a homily.
While Latin might be the official “legal” language of the Church, we are called to be practical for the benefit of others. And learning Spanish directly contributes to the welfare of Spanish speaking peoples.

 

[stpurl]

I do wonder what the history of the Catholic Church would have been if they had had such a ‘pragmatic’ approach. Consider how many alliances and territories existed. Germany and Italy weren’t even countries in the modern sense until the late 19th century; you’d have all kinds of dialects and constantly changing languages. Ah the fun of Norman French segueing into English and then Gaelic and Welsh and all the either languages. No nice unifying Latin that all could get along with, and as various countries hit the ‘top nation’ status and their prelates were more important, the ‘refusal’ to hear from ‘mongrel’ or ‘lesser countries’. Who would have picked English as a dominant language centuries ago?

Heck, even take today’s language. Sixty years ago, GAY meant happy and joyous. What does it mean today? Can you imagine the fun of trying to figure out what some Bohemian encyclicals and Bibles and theological studies meant in the 12th century?

 

[ThomasMT]

With time limited, there are generally bigger fish to fry.

7 years is not THAT limited. One would think that the still official language of the Church deserves a little more respect than your sentiment suggests. Fortunately, the FSSP seminaries manage to find the time.

 

[ThomasMT]

except with seminarians that are specifically going to require it in their future careers.

Aren’t they all potential Bishops, Cardinals, and even Popes?

 

[Jbrady]

Aren’t they all potential Bishops, Cardinals, and even Popes?

Bishops and Cardinals don’t have much use of Latin, either. It’s far from a job requirement, and hasn’t been for a long time. Even by the time of Vatican II, the majority of the assembled cardinals and bishops did not know Latin to the point that they could follow the proceedings or respond in Latin. By the time of the 2005 conclave, only a single cardinal elector was able to speak Latin.

Sorry, but learning Latin, or any other language, to the point where it is actually useful is a HUGE investment of time, effort and resources that, for most priests, bishops and cardinals will never pay off.

One would think that the still official language of the Church deserves a little more respect than your sentiment suggests.

No sentiment here (I have an undergraduate degree in Classical Languages myself). Just practical considerations. It’s a very expensive tool with limited application for most clerics. The time, effort and resources can be better spent on acquiring more useful tools.

If you want to convince seminaries to devote more time to Latin, your going to have to come up with a better reason than it gives you the warm fuzzies.

 

[ThomasMT]

Bishops and Cardinals don’t have much use of Latin, either

With the exception of the most recent one, it’s kind of amusing to think that a Cardinal would need translators to read a Papal encyclical… that’s one example where it would come in handy.

 

[Jbrady]

With the exception of the most recent one, it’s kind of amusing to think that a Cardinal would need translators to read Papal encyclicals… that’s one example where it would come in handy.

I don’t see what you find amusing in that. Why do you think anyone should invest a huge amount of time and effort to learn a language so they can read an encyclical that might appear once every few years, or less. To the point where they can get more out of reading the Latin version than a translation. That takes a lot of work for very little payoff, in most cases.

 

[prof38]

In the early 1960s, I took Latin and Greek in high school in college. Latin, and Greek come in handy in biological sciences, law, and vocabulary. I visited Vatican City and the Holy Land with younger priests and pilgrims. I was the only one who could translate the signs.

 

[Jbrady]

In the early 1960s, I took Latin and Greek in high school in college. Latin, and Greek, come in handy in biological sciences, law, and vocabulary. I visited Vatican City and the Holy Land with younger priests and pilgrims. I was the only one who could read the signs.

Did the same ten years later. Four years of Latin and three of Greek in prep school, then a degree in Classical languages as a second major.

While I enjoyed it immensely, and it helped a lot with biological and medical vocabulary, the practical return on investment was nowhere the amount of time that had to be invested. It was nice to have as a second major, though, basically just for fun.

 

[ThomasMT]

If you dont see the “payoff” of our priests having some degree of understanding of the official, universal language of the Church, there is little more that I can say that would convince you otherwise… at least on a social media forum. I will simply conclude by repeating my earlier observation that traditional rite seminaries such as FSSP are able to muster the time and resources to teach Latin to a sufficient enough degree that works as foundational as the “Summa” (for ex.) can be read with a reasonable degree of sufficiency, in the language that they were written. In spite of this, the seminarians are still fully equipped for the “bigger fish” they may be called to “fry.” I seriously doubt that such a seemingly fundamental requirement leaves them deprived of anything that any other seminary may have to offer. On the contrary, most likely.

 

[commenter]

Jbrady:

With time limited, there are generally bigger fish to fry.

7 years is not THAT limited. One would think that the still official language of the Church deserves a little more respect than your sentiment suggests. Fortunately, the FSSP seminaries manage to find the time.

Does FSSP require Latin beyond what’s needed for offering the EF and other Religious services in Latin? My hunch is that they likely do not, though some seminarians choose to.

There is a great deal getting crowded into the seminary curriculum including issues such as diversity, legal liability, drugs, family problems beyond the imagination of yesterday clergy, sexuality concerns, as well as the need for thorough doctrine.

I think Latin is indeed an important part of a liberal arts education, but as much for laity as for clergy. By the time someone reaches seminary it’s nice if they did catch some Latin back in high school, but…

If they teach a language in seminary, Spanish (in the U S).

 

[ThomasMT]

There is a great deal getting crowded into the seminary curriculum including issues such as diversity

I’m familiar with this loaded term within the context of today’s socio-political concerns. What does that mean with regard to Church doctrine, theology, spiritual formation, priestly duties, etc?

 

[commenter]

commenter:

There is a great deal getting crowded into the seminary curriculum including issues such as diversity

I’m familiar with this loaded term within the context of today’s socio-political concerns. What does that mean with regard to Church doctrine, theology, spiritual formation, priestly duties, etc?

I bolded part of your post. I’m no liberal. But just as priests have to know something about financial management and admin, they also have to relate to the social environment of today (which I am not endorsing). They also learn about minimizing legal liability.

 

[ThomasMT]

Ok, it is what it is then.