Thank you for the further info, that definitely helps!

Howdy. not Peter, but I believe I can answer your questions.

1) Catholic seminary is made up of two parts: studying philosophy and studying theology. Philosophy can take 2-4 years, while theology if 4 years. St. John Vianney is what’s called a “college seminary” or “minor seminary” and is merely the philosophy portion, and the theology portion must be completed elsewhere at a “major seminary”, such as Sacred Heart Major Seminary, the Saint Paul Seminary, Mundelein Seminary, etc.

2) It depends greatly on the diocese on how tough it is to get into. Some dioceses do seem to take anyone with a pulse, but they still must at the very least have all their candidates undergo some psychological evaluation at a minimum. In my experience, knowing people who have applied and people who are in seminary, many dioceses are not afraid to turn away candidates who are sketchy. They know the price to pay of having priests who abuse – and they don’t want to risk that. A number for my diocese I heard recently was only 50% of people who applied got accepted. You mention a “seminary mental/emotional evaluation” – it’s not performed by the seminary, but by an outside licensed psychologist or psychiatrist. It usually includes the MMPI-2, among other things. It is a legit test. Priest shortage numbers are also greatly exaggerated in places – again, in my diocese they are ordaining either at replacement rate or above each year. In many places the problem isn’t that there aren’t enough priests – it’s that demographics have changed and where it used to make sense to have a parish just isn’t financially feasible anymore. Again, depends diocese-to-diocese.

1) To become a Catholic Priest, is it required to go to graduate seminary (like the one on UST south campus/the one in Detroit the author attended)? I’m a little confused, and thought people who graduated from St. Vianny were ordained as priests? (#StupidLutheranQuestion)

2) Towards the end of the essay, the author briefly mentions in passing that there are mechanisms in place to prevent those who are unworthy/unsuitable from entering the seminary (I’m assuming he is referring to those who are sexual predators, or severally mentally ill/emotionally unstable). “Regarding seminaries themselves, there are systems in place already to keep unsavory characters out of the priesthood, so I don’t think those need to change.”

Could the author (or anyone else with knowledge on the subject) discuss these mechanisms further? Because right now, speaking strictly as a non-RC-outsider looking in and peeking over the wall, based on news reporting about all the sex-abusers in the church, that there really is no such system in place. It looks like it is harder and more challenging to pass a police officer recruit psych test (which is also rightfully being called into question and legitimacy with recent tragic events) than it is to pass a seminary mental/emotional evaluation. From the outside, it frankly looks like the RCC is willing to take on anyone with a pulse who walks through the door and is willing to take the vows as a priest, especially in the modern era when the RCC is desperate for new recruits as the previous generation ages out, and churches are closing partially due to a lack of priests.

Agree with the gaslighting term, based on this testimony.