Replies

I would not expect Paul Likoudis to have a single good thing to say about the postconciliar Church. He never has, in any of his columns in THE WANDERER. This book just continues his tut-tutting tradition.

He would, no doubt, think that a parish like ours, St. Michael's in Bedford, Texas, with 8,000 members, 5,000 of which attend Mass on Sundays, is liberal. Four or five children are baptized at Masses, every single Sunday; forty high-school juniors are confirmed every year; and we welcome anywhere from 60 to 125 new Catholics into our Church every single Easter.

The pastor, Fr. Johnson, follows the rubrics with almost no variation, but he never says the "traditional Mass." The 5:00 Mass on Sundays, dubbed the "Youth Mass", is standing room only and typically lasts two hours.

We have a volunteer staff, from lectors, to Eucharistic Ministers, to RCIA instructors and helpers, to youth ministry, to engaged ministry, to RCIA sponsors, that numbers over 500 dedicated Catholics.

Where do we fit in, with our smiling, happy parish family, in Paul Likoudis' dour view of American Catholicism?

Negative, negative, negative. If Paul Likoudis ever says one good thing about the modern Church, please post it on FR, as it will be breaking news for sure.

We have a volunteer staff, from lectors, to Eucharistic Ministers, to RCIA instructors and helpers, to youth ministry, to engaged ministry, to RCIA sponsors, that numbers over 500 dedicated Catholics.

Yeah, and there are plenty of Evangelical churches that can boast the same kind of numbers. What, exactly, is your point? Two questions: What percentage of the population of your parish is Hispanic? How many Spanish Masses are said each Sunday?

I'm leaning a little with you. Our parish is "traditional" in the sense that there are no or very few (outside of the dumb hand-holding during the Our Father) liturgical abuses. We have different musical styles at the different masses, but I've been at all times and the mass is the same. the earliest mass is mostly older Catholics, limited music; the next mass is organ and choir; the next mass (which I usually attend) is piano, guitar and choir; the last mass is a lone female soprano.

But the most important thing, is that the liturgy is sound and there are no abuses; they haven't moved the tabernacle or the crucifix; the church is "modern" in the sense that it is relatively new (about 20 years old), but it's conservative in design.

Anyway, while I agree that there is a definite problem with homosexuality in some dioceses, and I believe that some of the seminaries need to be cleaned up, most parishes are sound.

I heard Michael Rose talking on Catholic Radio (Steven Wood's show on Thursday) and he was very interesting. He talked about his interviews and his observations, but also said that some of the seminaries were being cleaned up, and as the offending priests grow old, they are being replaced with traditional, pious men. Some seminaries (the good ones) are turning men away because they are full.

The difference between the tone of this book (from reading this post) and Rose's book, is that Rose is optimistic and obviously loves the church and the love shines through in his speech and his optimism. The tone of this post is pessimistic and depressing, as if nothing can be done short of tearing down the church and rebuilding it.

I admit, I haven't read either book, only excerpts. I know there is a problem and it must be dealt with, but we must do it with love and respect and faith.

JMHO. God bless.