I've lived in two AFrican countries, and in the Philippines.
If you prefer, I could write that Jesus doesn't care if the person is a white rich TV commentator or a poor Osage or Chippewa woman. Or if the commentator was college educated snob or an Okie from Muscogee...
Jesus founded a church, not a cult based on medieval customs. I loved the Latin mass, but the way we approach God is based on our own culture. I have no problem with Latin masses in St. Paul Minnesota, nor masses with Apache chants in New Mexico, nor Guitar masses in Ipiales Colombia, nor with African dances with drums and dancing.
I do have a problem with people who think good Catholics who think Gregorian chant and Latin are boring means they can't be Catholic.
There has been problems after every council, partly diabolic, and partly due to the customs of men.
A lot of what Buchanan et al loved is not Catholicism but the Jansenistic rules of pre vatican II Catholicism in the USA.
It appears in hindsight that the American Church's response to the cultural revolution of the 1960's should have been to become more intolerant of the secular world and 'Jansenistic' in its morality, not less.
I would suggest that the way we approach worship (and thus, God) is based on the Judaeo-Christian tradition.
Your calling PJB a Jansenist is ludicrous, and not a contribution to the discussion. Among other things, you have no way of substanting that canard from the editorial printed above...
Your service in other countries is to be admired. What does that have to do with the editorial? PJB's POINT WAS: that American numbers are down. Perhaps they are up, down, sideways, or non-existent in other places. Necessarily, PJB addressed the USA because the numbers IN THE SURVEY were from the USA.
Sheesh!!