[BlueDragon]

They conveniently placed this year's figure in the context of previous years' so that you could then convert it into a percentage, do a victory dance and accuse of them of covering up "anti-Catholic statistics".

Victory dance?

And this; "accuse them of covering up "anti-Catholic statistics"?

40% overall decline, despite a recent uptick (595 people --- out of an overall population of more than 320 million people? how many of the wanna-be, hoping to be "priests" are Mexican immigrants?) -- and the knives came out as if he was one of the authors of Vatican II...

There was no dancing, and there was no open "accusing of covering up". But there was a simple pointing out that a long term trend was downwards.

For doing that, noting that aspect of things, he was set upon personally and forthwith by FRomans.

[Legatus]

and the knives came out as if he was one of the authors of Vatican II...

Laugh, I thought I'd die!

To be fair though most of the Catholics still posting on FReep are thrilled silly with VatII. Yes, If I'd jumped all over him you would have nailed it but for future reference when you're talking about the normal Catholics around here you might write "and the knives came out as if he'd said something positive about the SSPX".

Here, hold my beer and watch this:

"The SSPX isn't in schism."

[marshmallow]

But there was a simple pointing out that a long term trend was downwards.

Alex's contribution was to select the raw numbers for 2015 and 1965 provided in the article, convert them into a percentage and then rebuke Catholic Culture for not doing likewise....

An ability seemingly impossible for Catholic World News. Can't have any "anti-Catholic" statistics! (post #10).

A ridiculous statement since the article source makes no attempt to hide the raw numbers nor the overall trend on which Alex's calculation was based.

It's a two line article. The deficit between 2015 and 1965 is already abundantly clear from the raw numbers provided.....as well as the recent uptick.