The actual curriculum of the ecclesiastical, or, as it is usually called, the diocesan seminary, in which the system of theological education is im parted, dates in its present organization from the Council of Trent, but, like the system itself, is the outcome of a gradual historical growth. ]n the early centuries theological education was received partly at central eatechetical schools (e.g. at Alexandria and Antioch), but chiefly at the, bishop's residence and under his guidance and spirit. The episcopal school was afterwards supplemented by the monastic institutions and the schools established by Charlemagne. These in turn were succeeded by the great medieval universities and the co/it-gin attached thereto. The growing laxity of discipline at these institu tions induced the Council of Trent to establish the present seminary system, which since then has gradually become universal throughout the Church. The purpose of these institutions, one or more of which exist in almost every diocese or ecclesiastical province, is primarily a moral one; the training of the person, the forming of the youth, by strict discipline and the practices of religion, to habits of self-control and to the shaping of his life in harmony with the priestly ideal. The graded course of study pursued in them averages from ten to twelve years, divided into three distinct but closely connected stages: the preparatory, the philosophical, and the strictly theological, to which the first two are subordinate. In the preparatory department the usual college studies are pursued, though special importance is placed on Latin. As this lan guage is the vehicle of most of the subsequent studies—text-book and lecture being usually in Latin—the student passing from the preparatory seminary is required to have an easy reading familiarity and a fair speaking facility in the language. The two years of philosophy are devoted to logic, psychology, metaphysics, and ethics (including sociology), the physical sci ences, Hebrew, and Greek. The theological cur riculum of four years is organized on the follow ing lines: T. Theology in Its Unity (Synthesis).— (1) The theologian: His ideal, moral, and intellec tual equipment; preparatory training in lan guages, philosophy, history, natural sciences, and arts. (2) Nature, origin, and classification of religion. (3) Relation of theology to religion. (4) Object. nature, relations (to reason and faith), and history of theological science.
II. Departments of Theology (Analysis).— A. Historical.—(1) The Bible, criticism, exe gesis. (2) Biblical theology: (a) history of the Old and New Testament; (b) their general doc trinal contents; (c) aids to study: biblical Pililology, a rcleology, hermeneutics. ( 3) Church history: (1) scope, methods, epochs; (2) divi sions: (a) patrology; (b) symbolism; (c) eccle siastical archeology and art; (d) auxiliary dis ciplines: geography and statistics, ecclesiastical chronology, and philology.
B. Systematic Theology.—(1) Apologetics; (2) dogmatics, relation to morals; (3) moral theology (Christian ethics).
C. Practical Thcology.—(1) The Christian pastorate as a continuation of Christ's ministry in its several departments. magisterial. sacerdo tal, gubernatorial. (2) Divisions: catechetics: pastoral didactics; the instruction of children.
(3) Homiletics: theory of sacred eloquence. (4) Liturgy. (5) Theory of the relations of pastor and people.
D. Canon. Law.—Science of ecclesiastical dis cipline.
In some minor details the foregoing pro gramme will vary according to local conve nience. On the whole, however, the course as outlined is followed in every ecclesiastical semi nary. As at each successive stage in the Church's history special care was devoted to one or other of the theological branches in answer to external and internal exigencies, so, too, at the present day. In the philosophical depart ment empirical psychology, epistemology, and sociology are absorbing more interest and are being pursued in a more historical light and a more critical spirit than was the case a genera tion ago. The same is true of biblical studies, ecclesiastical history, and apologetics within the theological domain.
From the foregoing account it will be readily inferred that the question of 'reconstructing theology,' which has of late been engrossing many minds outside the Catholic Church, has no mean ing in connection with the system of theological education within her pale. The primary prin ciples of that system are the 'articles of faith' contained within the deposit of revealed truth, which, together with the assurance of inerrancy in discerning, formulating, and interpreting them, she claims to have received from her Founder. In the exercise of the logical faculty developing those principles and coordinating the conclusions into a systematic body of theological science, in the work of the critical faculty within the domains of biblical, historical, and scientific studies, she recognizes the fullest rights of hu man reason, provided it does not usurp the license of transgressing the ascertained mani festations of the divine reason.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. The best work in English is Bibliography. The best work in English is Hogan's Clerical Studies (Boston, 1898). Kihn's Encyklopfidie and Methodologie der Theologie (Freiburg, 1892) is profound, erudite, and rich in bibliography. Krieg's Eneyklopiidie der Theologisohen Wissensehaften (i1)., 1899) has the same qualities, but is more compendious. Consult also: Didiot, Corns de tbeologie catho lique (Paris, 1894) : Aubry, Ickes sur la theorie cutholigue des sciences et sur la synthese des connaissanees hamaines dans la theologie; id., Les Brands seminaires en France (Paris, 1894) ; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual of Catho lic Theology, based on Scheeben's Dogmatik; and Hunter, Outlines of Dogmatic Theology (London, and New York, 1890).