The final cause is confusion. “Confusion” is defined as “a state of being discomfited, disconcerted, chagrined, or embarrassed especially at some blunder” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1966: 47). According to Michael Rose, “But in all too many cases the young man leaves [the seminary] confused, not really knowing why he isn’t suitable for the priesthood but accepting that conclusion all the same” (p. 11). Some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have unethical workers who embarrass ethical seminary students with fictional crimes. As a result, some ethical seminary students feel discomfited and confused about their vocations to the “sacred ministries” (Canon no. 232). Further, according to Rev. John Lewandowski, “A lot of seminarians were just struck dumb” by the assigned readings at the seminary. “They were confused. They didn’t know what to say” (p. 101). Some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have heretical teachers who twist the Catholic faith and also apostate teachers who reject the Catholic faith. Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries reject seminarians who love the Lord and embarrass seminarians who wish to defend “the solemn Magisterium of the Church” (Canon no. 750. 1), some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences.
The material cause is a Roman Catholic seminary. “Seminary” is defined as “an institution preparing young men for diocesan priesthood” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1966: 2064). According to Canon Law, “Young men who intend to enter the priesthood are to be provided with a suitable spiritual formation and prepared for their proper duties in a major seminary throughout the entire time of formation” (235, no. 1). Young men who wish to become a priest in order to serve the Church with a life of sacrifice must enter a seminary. According to Michael Rose, seminarians are “young men devoting themselves to the sacrificial life of the priesthood” (p. 2)
The formal cause of a seminary should be Roman and Catholic. According to Michael Rose, a healthy seminarian “looks to the pope for spiritual guidance and practical direction” (p. 43). Sadly, some seminaries in the United States are neither Roman nor Catholic. Some seminarians in the United States who look to the pope for spiritual guidance are called “too rigid” (p. 43). Further, some seminarians in the United States who look to the pope for practical direction are called “too dogmatic” (p. 43). As a result, Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have “fewer and fewer” students (p. 2). Further, the Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have decreased capacity to 50%. In 1967 there’re 8,159 Catholic seminarians in the United States and in 2018 there were 3, 369 seminarians. Michael Rose writes, “The media and often Catholic theologians with a predetermined agenda emphasized their own interpretation of the council documents rather than what the council fathers actually said” (p. 223). According to Vatican II, priests “profess themselves before men as willing to be dedicated to the office committed to them-namely,… to show themselves as a chaste virgin for Christ and thus to evoke the mysterious marriage established by Christ” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, no. 16). Further, according to the Council of Trent, priests are to be “conspicuous for piety and chasteness of morals, as that a shining example of good works and a lesson how to live may be expected from them” (Session 23, ch. xiv). Sadly, some Roman Catholic seminaries today reject Church Tradition. According to a student at the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley, CA, Father Thomas Gleeson, S.J., “said to me that if I wanted to be friends with him, I shouldn’t be surprised if it became sexual” (22). Thus, because the poor quality of some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States has reduced their total enrollment in half, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. As Roger Cardinal Mahoney said, “One of the fruits of the Second Vatican Council is the shortage of priestly vocations” (p. 210). Further, according to one potential seminarian at Bishop White seminary in Seattle, his application to the seminary was rejected, because the pre-seminary “directress did not find him worthy of her program” (p. 208).
The principal agent of every Roman Catholic seminary should be the Lord. According to Pope John Paul II, “The Church’s work of formation is a continuation in time of Christ’s own work” (Pastores Dabo Voris, 1992: no. 2). A Roman Catholic seminary should be performing the work of the Lord. Pope John Paul II quotes the Gospel of Mark where the Lord “went up the mountain and summoned those He wanted, and they came to Him. And He appointed twelve, to be with Him, to be sent out to preach and to have authority to cast out demons” ” (Mk. 3:13-15). The Lord wants men to be with Him and He wants them to use His power while preaching and performing exorcisms. Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries are not doing the work of the Lord, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences.
The preparing agents of every Roman Catholic seminaries should be faculty and staff who are loyal to the Pope. Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States employ faculty and staff who are not loyal to the Pope and do not continue the work of the Lord. According to Michael Rose, “The seminarian who arrives on campus expecting to find faculty and staff that love the Catholic faith and teach what the Church teaches can be sadly disappointed” (p. 89). For example, seminarians at some Roman Catholic seminaries will learn that “the magisterium is abusive and Christ was really not divine” (p. 90). Further, seminarians who kneel during mass will be called “suspicious and rigid” by the faculty and staff (p. 121). Further, some seminarians “were actually kicked out” of their seminaries, “because they expressed orthodox opinions that were ‘dangerous and harmful to other people’” (p. 110). Consequently, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States are harmful and “very demoralizing for many of the men there” (p. 109). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries compel and force the faculty and staff to downplay the Lord, His Pope, His holy Doctors and the rite of exorcism, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to a seminarian at Mount Angel seminary in Oregon, “I was apprised of what was going on there but I didn’t know it would be quite as bad as it turned out to be” (p. 107).
The assisting agents of every Roman Catholic seminary should be faculty and staff who help seminarians “grow in holiness and commitment as he makes his way toward ordination” (p. 129). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have faculty and staff that reject the holiness of seminarians and recruit new members to their own, artificial and boring religion. For example, if a seminarian “opposes the ‘party line’” of the particular brand of heterodoxy promoted by his seminary, then he is “labeled as mentally unfit and kept under close scrutiny for his own safety” (p. 130). Further, there is a “vice rector” at a Roman Catholic seminary in the United States “really doesn’t understand why young guys want to be so prayerful, why they want to dress in clerics. To him, they’re all nuts” (p. 133). Further, some seminarians are “sent to ongoing psychological counseling for ‘rigorism’” (p. 131). In fact, the reply to the objection that some seminarians have the problem of rigorism is to affirm that some seminarians are blessed with “stoutheartedness in the faith” and audacity (p. 131). As a result, some young men interested in holiness and ordination become sad and depressed at the seminary. A former seminarian in Boston writes, “I was in bad shape. Very depressed, confused” (p. 135). Further, the seminarian writes, “I was feeling depressed by events at the seminary after I was labeled” as a rigid person who is not flexible (p. 134). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States compel and pressure the faculty and staff to “deny the Church’s authority” (p. 139) and to support “the irrational process of eliminating men from ordination” (p.142), some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influence.
The instrumental agents of every Roman Catholic seminary should be Catholic devotions, such as “Eucharistic adoration, benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, public rosaries and novenas” (p. 117). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States reject Catholic devotions and approve “liturgical abuses” (p. 118). For example, some masses have “inclusive language, seminarians reading parts of the Eucharistic prayer, celebrants with no vestments, and standing through the Eucharistic consecration” (p. 118) Further, if a healthy seminarian expresses his “frustration” with the liturgical abuses, then he will be called “rigid and uncharitable” by the faculty and staff (p. 118). Further, a seminarian’s “participation in publicly praying the rosary… amounted to black marks for the aspiring priest” (p. 128). As a result, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States are harmful and “detrimental to a young man’s vocation… It erodes the orthodox seminarian’s confidence in his seminary” (p. 122). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States encourage the faculty and staff to reject seminarians who pray the rosary, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to one seminarian at St. Mary’s seminary in Baltimore, “I’m not going to say this is verging on the demonic. This is demonic” (p. 122).
The counseling agents of a Roman Catholic seminary should be the Pope and the Magisterium. According to Michael Rose, “A seminary is a place where a young man is prepared to live out his priestly vocation in fidelity and holiness in service to the Church” (p. 218). If a young man successfully graduates from a Roman Catholic seminary, then he will become a priest with “a clearly defined doctrinal role, authoritative leadership, personal esteem and status” (p. 222). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States reject the Pope, downplay the Magisterium, and encourage young men to become shallow and selfish. For example, “the teachings of Vatican II were sufficiently distorted to convince Catholics that in living out the Christian vocation, the Church had called for a shift away from the self-sacrifice model to the self-fulfillment model” (p. 231). As a result, some Roman Catholic seminaries expel genuinely Catholic young men. According to one observer, “Most of the time, when a guy was expelled from the seminary it was because he was too Catholic” (p. 171). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States ignore the Popes and the Magisterium, and because they downplay penances and highlight selfishness, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to one seminarian at St. Mark’s seminary in Erie, PA, “It became evident that there was a diabolical element at the seminary” (p. 162).
The inductions of every Roman Catholic seminary should include the observations of students who are “striving for personal holiness” and “seeking to preach the Gospel as the Church teaches” (p. 14). Unfortunately, observing some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States show that priests “are so distressed by [the poor quality of formation] that they could never recommend” (p. 45) the seminary to qualified candidates. Further, “young people interested in papal teachings are no longer attracted” to the seminary which is why seminary enrollment is down 50% and there is a priest shortage (p. 22). Further, “in England the ‘weeding out’ of orthodox men starts from day one” (p. 18). Further, according to one candidate for the seminary, “I would not be able to cope with living and studying in such an atmosphere of dissent and disobedience” (p. 19). As a result, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States produce students who are unhappy and miserable. According to a former seminarian, I “felt repulsed by the whole situation” (p. 17). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries exclude preaching and holiness, and because they promote dissent and disobedience, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to one seminarian at the Immaculate Conception seminary in New York, “Many bishops… are totally unaware of the doublespeak, propaganda, and deception that is used to identify, isolate and remove seminarians deemed ‘too Catholic’” (p. 172).
The history of Roman Catholic seminaries show that Catholic seminaries should defend human rights, the traditional marriage, and the value of women. According to Michael Rose, “It was the Catholic Church that has upheld human rights throughout history by opposing sexual aberrations such as polygamy, castration, female mutilation, pederasty, and prostitution” (p. 198). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries downplay objective human rights and highlight subjective human cravings. Michael Rose writes, “[A] ‘self-fulfillment’ model was replacing the traditional ‘self-sacrifice’ model in the priesthood and religious life” (p. 198). Further, according to one observer, it is “the archbishop who had allowed potential seminarians, whose loyalty to Church teachings is viewed as ‘rigid and inflexible,’ to be rejected” (p. 195). Sadly, some Roman Catholic seminaries “lead to destructive behaviors among… priests” and seminarians (p. 201). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries no longer teach the value of human rights and instead teach the goodness of human cravings, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to a Franciscan Report on seminaries in 1993, “A cancerous evil existed in the institutions which exerted, and continues to exert, its pernicious effects in the lives of those who were abused and in the lives of… priests and brothers” (p. 201).
Roman Catholic seminaries should be schools where a Catholic student may study “with men who shared his faith and one for the Church” (p. 65).Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States are analogous to a country club. “Country club” is defined as “upper-class suburban or outlying club for social life, golf, and other recreation” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1966: 521).According to George Neymayr, the “once formidable society [of Jesuits] is now a corrupt club for homosexual dilettantes and anti-papal dissenters” (22). Further, according to a seminarian at St. John’s Seminary in Boston, “It was always a concern for the homosexual. That was what counted and the only thing that counted” (p. 69). Further, seminarians in Boston “who accept the Church’s teachings on morality have been… dismissed from the seminary as ‘troublemakers,’… threatened by classmates and faculty” and told “that if they did not submit to homosexuality, then their priestly careers would be” stopped (p. 70). Further, a seminarian at Mundelein in Chicago said, “If a straight student complains about [gay couples on campus], then he gets blackballed as a ‘conservative’” (p. 62). Further, a former seminary professor said, “Some of the gay faculty members during faculty meetings [were] hostile, immature, and childish. [They] huddles together, whispered, sent notes to each other and countered my every word” (p 80). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries are country clubs of vice and anti-Christian behavior, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. A seminarian at the American College in Louvain said, “If I stayed silent, then I would have been complicit in the cover-up of a great moral evil” (p. 78).
Roman Catholic seminaries should be places where students can receive messages from the Pope and the Magisterium “for spiritual guidance and practical direction” (p. 43). “Magisterium” is defined as “the church’s teaching power or function” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1966: 1358). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States send signals to students that they will not receive messages from the Pope or the Magisterium. According to Thomas Fath, “[T]he persons performing the initial interviews [in seminaries] have a modernistic bias about the qualities a priest-to-be should have” (p. 28). “Modernism” is defined as “a system of interpretation of Christian doctrine developed at the end of the 19th century and condemned by Pope Pius in 1907 that denied the objective truth of revelation” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1966: 1452). Further, According to the Catholic Medical Association in 1999, “Mental health professionals who do not support the teachings of the Catholic Church… have been chosen to evaluate candidates and reject candidates who accept the Church’s teachings on the grounds that they are ‘rigid’” (p. 39). Further, a vocations director in Covington, Kentucky, rejected a candidate who was loyal to the Pope and the Magisterium and said, “I cannot recommend him. He is only using the ordained ministry to keep from dealing with his inner feelings” (p. 34). Consequently, because some Roman Catholic seminaries send signals to students from non-Catholic modernism and non-Catholic psychology, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to Michael Rose, the seminarian is often “so stunned that he is unable to explain to friends and family why he was rejected, and afraid to discuss what transpired at the seminary” (p. 54). Further, according to one seminarian at the Immaculate Conception seminary in New York, “The orthodox seminarians were ridiculed and humiliated in front of the entire class” (p. 173).
The motive of every Catholic seminarian should be to follow the reasonable authority of the Popes and the Magisterium. According to Michael Rose, a seminarian should use “the authority and teaching of the Church as one of the sources that formed his belief” (p. 153). Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States discourage a person from following the reasonable authority of the Church. For example, the dean of Cincinnati’s seminary criticized a loyal seminarian and said, “I frankly do not believe that people will find him an easy person with whom to work when he occupies a leadership position” (p. 156). Further, some faculty and staff at seminaries “watched” loyal students “closely for signs of ‘rigidity’” (p. 147). Consequently, Catholic seminarians who are motivated to obey the Popes and the Magisterium are regularly rejected by seminaries. According to a former seminarian in Cincinnati, “The result is that many good men are dismissed” (p. 157). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries criticize students loyal to the Pope and the Magisterium, and because they use the term “rigid” in relation to students loyal to the Pope and Magisterium, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences, According to one seminarian at Saint Vincent Seminary in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, “In seminaries that see no problem” with decadent and cowardly students, “the orthodox seminarian can be signaled out for ‘vocational inquisition’ if only for defending Church teaching” (p. 157).
Roman Catholic seminaries should be a place where students feel joy while praying the rosary, feel humble while adoring the Lord in the Eucharist, and feel courage while fasting once a week. Unfortunately, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States prevent the students from feeling joy, humility and courage. According to Michael Rose, a former seminarian from Detroit “was summed up as ‘rigid’ for outlining his prayer life as consisting of Eucharistic adoration, the rosary and weekly fasting” (p. 49). Further, a former seminarian from Oklahoma said, “I was definitely not encouraged” (p. 42). Further, a former seminarian from New Orleans said, “I cannot emphasize enough that this time in my life [at the seminary] was a very serious crisis of faith for me” (p. 45). Further, according to Michael Rose, a former seminarian from Detroit learned “in his conversation with an official of the archdiocese” that he “was a problem,” because “the archdiocese found [him to be] too orthodox” (p. 50). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries discourage seminarians from Eucharistic adoration, the rosary and weekly fasting, and because they hurt the seminarians virtue of loyalty, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. According to Dr. William Coulson, if the faculty and staff “admitted that” joyful, humble and courageous seminarians “were the right people to bring into the seminaries, then they would have to admit that their whole program is wrong” (p. 37).
Roman Catholic seminaries should be a place where students are encouraged to grow the moral virtues, such as temperance, fortitude and prudence, and to develop their intellectual virtues, such as conjecture, circumspection and caution. Unfortunately, statistics show that some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States do not encourage students to grow in the moral virtues. According to Michael Rose, “Forty percent (40%) of the seminarians” were non-celibate, non-chaste and actively affectionate with others (p. 85). Further, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States damage the intellectual virtues of the students. Michael Rose writes, “Every year dozens of men are subjected to the same tactics in order to undermine their vocations” (p. 175). Further, St. Pius X seminary in Covington, Kentucky lost 87% of the students in one year. Michael Rose writes, “Numbers went from more than 140 seminarians to about eighteen men in the 1982-83 academic year” (p. 206). Thus, because some Roman Catholic seminaries have decreased genuine vocations to the priesthood, crushed the moral virtues of excellent young men, and damaged the intellectual virtues of bright students, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. A professor at a Roman Catholic seminary once told Catholic seminarians, I am “sick and tired… of hearing about Thomas Aquinas. I don’t want to hear his name again” (p. 80). What the professor does not realize is that the Angelic Doctor is the best role model and teacher for courageous seminarians who desire lectures on faith, purity, exorcisms, moral virtues and intellectual virtues.
I shall now use my freedom to review the above investigation. Hmm… I shall now use my freedom to make a choice. I have decided that I prefer the passion and the statistic. I shall now use my freedom to make a command. Some some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have faculty members who cannot admit that their whole program is wrong” (p. 37). Further, statistics show that some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States crush the moral virtues and damage the intellectual virtues of the students. Therefore, some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences
There are six objections to the conclusion above. Firstly, it can be stated that some “bishops and rectors don’t know that this kind of rot is eating away at the innards of the Church” (p. 115). The response to the first objection is to reply that if bishops and rectors do not know about the demonic influences at their seminaries and do not defeat the bad influences, then the bishops and rectors are using their authority in an incorrect and wrongful way. As one former seminarian from Wisconsin said, “[T]hat’s malfeasance” (p. 115).
Secondly, a person can object and say that the writer of the thesis that “some Roman Catholic seminaries have demonic influences” is “rigid” and needs “psychological counseling” (p. 131). The response to the second objection is to reply that every deficient person has a twisted and deceptive view of a health. For example, a stingy person who clings to pennies will blame a generous person for being a spendthrift, and a coward will blame a courageous person for being reckless. Similarly, a person trapped in demonic influences will blame a holy seminarian for being rigid and psychologically defective. In other words, the term ‘rigid’ is a deceptive way to describe a healthy person with “stoutheartedness in the faith” (p. 131)
Thirdly, a person can object to the above deliberation and declare that no Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences, because “this is not true” (p. 134) and “it’s the consensus of the faculty” (p. 134). The response to the third objection is to reply that it is true that some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences. Plus, the deceptive argument about the “consensus” and general agreement of the faculty lacks the power to weaken the conclusion about some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United State having demonic influences.
Fourthly, it can be objected that rigid seminarians need to learn how “to respect the opinions of others, whether or not they agreed with what the Church teaches” (p. 149). The response to the fourth objection is to reply that every person should respect the views of non-Catholics. Similarly, every faculty member at a Roman Catholic seminary should respect the views of loyal and stouthearted students rather than rudely discounting them as ‘rigid’. Sadly, a seminarian at Mount St. Mary’s seminary in Cincinnati and said that “he was never given the chance to articulate his views” (p. 149).
Fifthly, it can be objected that no Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States have demonic influences, because all Roman Catholic seminaries “must collapse” and destroy celibacy which is “the last vestige of patriarchy” and the system “of power, control, and sexism” (p. 193). The response to the fifth objection is to reply that deceived person trapped in evil influences would view celibacy as a bad thing that needs to be destroyed. Plus, according to Pope John Paul II, “the Church has no authority to confer priestly ordination on women” (p. 194). And the activity of obeying the authority of Pope John Paul II has the power to move a person away from the prison of demonic influences.
Sixthly, a person can object and state that it is good that seminaries have been reduced 50%, because “the priesthood is nothing more than an all-male clerical caste that excludes women” (p. 209). Destroying seminaries is the best way to destroy the forces that hurt women. The response to the sixth objection is to reply that destroying the careers of Catholic young men is not an ethical way to improve the lives of women. Plus, the priesthood is not just another ministry “alongside music ministers, youth ministers, hospitality ministers, et al” (p. 211). Priests are not defineda “by what they do” and are defined “by what they are – an alter Christus” (p. 211). Thus, it is deceptive to conclude that the Lord and His priests are sources of pain and hurt for women.
A solution to the problem of demonic influences in seminaries is clear. According to Pope Pius X (1858-1914), “In order for Jesus Christ to reign in the world, nothing is so necessary as the holiness of the clergy” (p. 14). If Roman Catholic seminaries wish to destroy the demonic influences on campus, then it is necessary for there to be priests “to preach and to have authority to cast out demons” (Mark 3: 14, 15). Further, a solution to the problem of demonic influences in some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States is possible. According to Michael Rose, “[T]he local bishop has the authority and opportunity to quickly ‘re-form’ his seminary. It can be done” (p. 245). It is possible for a bishop to purge a seminary of bad forces and to free a seminary from deceptive and vicious influences.
Studying the “Goodbye, Goodmen” text by Michael Rose helps a person learn about the unethical and criminal activities of faculty members and staff at some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States. According to Michael Rose, “The actions of the seminary formation staff or its representatives are not only unfair but unethical and, in moral terms, constitute outright calumny” (p. 51).
Further, studying the “Goodbye, Goodmen” text by Michael Rose allows a person to make the sad conjecture that moral, intellectual, and holy young men are rejected by some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States. According to Michael Rose, “One wonders: If the screening process isn’t catching the deviants, then it is the process designed to… merely prune the orthodox men from the vocations vine?” (p. 31). Further, studying the “Goodbye, Goodmen” text by Michael Rose allows a person to hypothesize that “their whole program is wrong” (p. 37). Some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States are failures and have been defeated.
The problem of illogical and unethical influences in some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States can be solved with the intellectual virtue of “foresight” and “the ability to predict what will be needed in the future”, as well as “circumspection” and “the quality of being wary” (“Dictionary,” Apple, Inc. 2019). The leaders at failed seminaries need to become virtuous, use foresight, and to look at thriving seminaries for solutions. Michael Rose writes, “Bishops and others charged with fostering vocations can easily look to the dioceses that are having success and try to model their own programs after these” (p. 234). In 2002 Michael Rose made a list of successful Catholic seminaries, such as: “Arlington, Lincoln, Peoria, Wichita, Bridgeport, Omaha and Rockford” (p. 239).
Further, the leaders at failed seminaries need to become strong, use circumspection and be wary of the priest shortage. Michael Rose writes how illogical and unethical leaders at failed seminaries “are unable to admit that the vocations shortage is not a naturally occurring phenomenon but rather a man-made crisis” (p. 234).
Further, the leaders at failed seminaries need to become prudent, use the virtue of “caution” and “take care to avoid danger or mistakes” (“Dictionary,” Apple, Inc. 2019). Avoid the dangers that the successful seminaries are avoiding. Michael Rose writes, “Pay close attention to the dioceses that have not suffered the priest shortage and vocations crisis” (p. 246).
Final remarks. The Lord wants men to be with Him, to use His power when preaching and to perform exorcisms. Unfortunately, the faculty and staff at some Roman Catholic seminaries in the United States do not want what the Lord wants.
I sent my analysis to a former student at St. John’s Seminary in Camarillo, CA, and he responded with the following. “Thanks for sending me this. I highlighted the spelling/grammar errors I found. This report is really good. It's interesting that much of what is in this report substantiated my perception of how crazy things seemed at the seminary. I felt like I was one of the few along who saw just how contradictory everything was. It's like they were trying to be as subtle as possible about propagating a heterodox faith along with always having plausible deniability if called out. It was annoying. I'm grateful for my time there, but am glad I left. I've noticed many others in my local community who are gravitating toward orthodox parishes with reverent liturgies. It's a confusing time to live in, because we want direction from our leaders, but are left on our own to try and navigate through all of this, both in the Church and politically and culturally.
© By Theodore Faulders, November 22, 2021.