The Disastrous Pontificate: Pope Francis Rupture from the Magisterium 

by Dominic J. Grigio

Os Justi Press(Lincoln, NE, 2025)

845 pages.

Already we have the first history of the pontificate of Pope Francis: The Disastrous Pontificate gives us an early summary of the Francis years. This substantial book is divided into three parts.  The first is a systematic exposition of the theological errors of Pope Francis. The second is a collection of statements and events in the reign of Francis, arranged chronologically month-by-month. The third section is a set of source materials supporting the author’s critique of Francis’s positions. 

Given my own interests, I focused  on the second part which forms a short history of Francis’s  papacy. It quotes Francis himself throughout the years of his pontificate. Some of “Francis’s“ statements are actually those of his supporters in and outside of the Vatican. In addition to the voice of Francis and friends, Grigio provides a running critical commentary on the Pope’s statements from contemporary sources. (A third voice which is largely missing, however, is that of the sycophantic official Catholic and secular media. )

Now much of the material in the second  part of the book is taken from LifeSiteNews, although Grigio also draws extensively on other sources in the secular and the official Catholic media. I confess I do not read LifesiteNews regularly, but I was nevertheless aware of almost all the matters discussed. There were, however,  one or two surprises. Such as where Pope Francis said he had read and liked Frederic Martel’s Inside the Closet of the Vatican, a pro-homosexual, pro-Bergoglio book which describes rampant homosexuality in the church and the Vatican  –  and also disparages Pope Benedict, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Muller, Bishop Ganswein… (p. 300, May 10, 2019)

This strictly chronological format does have the disadvantage of being a list of statements and actions by Francis without explanation or analysis of the context in which they occur. Thus,  I think it may be difficult for one who was not already familiar with the events of Francis’s papacy to fully follow what is described here. But this format also has an advantage –  we see each of the statements and actions of Francis as of the date they took place. As a matter of style, I did find tedious the author’s repetitive application of epithets to people and institutions (“the heterodox Tablet”) like in Homer or Old Germanic poetry.

Taken as a papal history, The Disastrous Pontificate is a tedious experience. It is the greatest possible contrast to the sometimes startling but often fascinating biographies of the Renaissance and baroque popes written by Ludwig von Pastor. Francis leaves us no such record of interesting acts,  holy or not.  This book is one long, monotonous rant, devoid of intelligence, insight and especially of humor.  Francis breaks the Conciliar ideology down into a set of slogans or buzzwords that he endlessly hammers home: going to the peripheries, mercy, tenderness, dialogue, the “outgoing Church,” “there’s no going back,” etc.  This is accompanied by the constant, coarse disparagement of adversaries. Ideological friends, however, are effusively praised and rewarded. Underlying everything is a manic cult of personality. ( The Disastrous Pontificate doesn’t mention the enormous number of books written by or about Bergoglio). As for Bergoglio’s administrative policies, they combine tyranny with incompetence ( e.g., the unending financial and managerial scandals in the Vatican). 

It’s unclear what  Pope Francis himself believed. If we read the numerous interviews with Eugenio Scalfari (never repudiated by the pope) one would have to say: very little. Francis did, however, revive the Conciliar movement of the 1960’s in its most radical form. He spoke of a ”cultural Revolution,”  a “paradigm shift” of living through a “change of epoch.” This experience of the allegedly changed world of today would now determine the theology of the Church. (pp. 474-75, November 1, 2023). What Pope Benedict called the “hermeneutic of rupture” could hardly be expressed more drastically.

Should I add that the achievements of Francis’s papacy outside of the strictly ecclesiastical sphere is virtually nonexistent? In terms of secular politics, Francis’s most notorious achievement was his accommodation with the government of China. Unless, that is, we count as “secular politics”  the wholesale adoption by Francis as his own  of the program of the European and American establishment: migrants, social programs, etc.  And  he looked the other way when this same establishment   -notably, President Biden- aggressively advocated practices like abortion or homosexual marriage.

Similarly,   artistic achievements of the Bergoglio papacy are utterly lacking. There is the “art “ of Fr. Marko Rupnik,  omnipresent at least until the other aspects of his career were exposed. There are “ideological” (Socialist Realism style) statues of migrants and the homeless. And there is “Luce,” the mascot of the 2025 jubilee year. The papacy today can no longer provide any impetus to artistic creativity.

Now when this book describes the Bergoglio pontificate as disastrous, I think the author means in the first instance the ideological destruction and the denial of Catholic principles in theology and morality. But I also think of the background of these events . The ongoing decline in the numbers of priests, seminarians and religious. The closing of churches and monasteries. The never-ending series of sexual abuse scandals and the resulting bankruptcies in the United States. And above all, the continuing decline of the practice of the Catholic faith among those still claiming to be Catholic.  Bergoglio himself did not understand or care about any of this:

Five places:  Belgium, Holland, Spain, Ireland and Quebec filled the world with missionaries. Today these five places have no vocations. it is a mystery: and in less than 100 years. How do we explain this to each other? I see no explanation….  I’m not concerned in the sense that we are merging, it is a sign of the times that indicates worldliness, that indicates a level of development that puts value elsewhere. (p 435: January 13, 2023)

The Pope’s indifference to this and other afflictions of today’s Church is amazing.

And what of Leo? Robert Prevost came to the Vatican to be an efficient implementor of Pope Francis’s policies. Thus: 

‘”On the 9th of September 2023, Pope Francis met with Archbishop Robert Prevost OSA , head of the dicastery for bishops and Archbishop Christophe Pierre Apostolic nuncio to the United States to discuss the Apostolic visitation of bishop Strickland. “

The recommendation put to Bergoglio was to request Strickland’s resignation. (p.450, September 9, 2023)

The rhetoric and style of Pope Leo is clearly very different from that set forth in this book. Leo has tended to avoid the confrontational rhetoric and name calling of his predecessor. He has introduced a calmer and more orderly style of governance. He has reached out to some  parties within the Church who had been slighted – or worse – by his predecessor. So, for example, he authorized a statement to the French bishops issued by Cardinal Parolin which had some kind words to say about traditionalists. This would have been unthinkable under Francis. Similarly, he’s made limited policy adjustments in personnel and policy at the level of the curia to assuage certain aggrieved parties and consolidate his more orderly and less mercurial style.

On the other hand, Pope Leo has not yet touched the substantive policies of his predecessor. He has emphasized his own continuity with Pope Francis.  That resemblance extends to some of Francis’s habits (extended interviews given on airplanes; the cultivation of preferred relationships with reporters) The new Pope has been extremely solicitous of other members of the Francis team.  In most cases he has retained the same personnel in the same positions. And these people have continued to take actions and issue statements entirely in line with the policies of Pope Francis – and have asserted that Pope Leo also will be doing the same.  It seems likely though, that Leo, by using a different tone and rhetoric, wants to defuse some of the confrontations stoked by Pope Francis while keeping his predecessor’s documents (and people) in place. I’ve expressed my fear that this approach may be inadequate in the light of what is happening in Germany, with the FSSPX, with the Vatican finances, with the homosexual movement  – the list is endless. 

Refecting on this book. I think the saddest part of all is this:  I have a great fear that Pope Leo and most of those the Vatican, upon reading this book, would find little wrong.  And there are further indicia of the Church’s crisis.  The author’s name, Dominic J. Grigio, is the pseudonym of a member of the clergy  “who cannot reveal his identity for fear of reprisals against himself and his diocese.” (Rorate Caeli). And some desperate “conservatives,” considering how a pope can make statements like the ones set out in this book,  have recourse to strange theories splitting the pope into “two bodies”  – a heretical pope and an orthodox pope. (p.44). Thus, the intolerable strain on the culture of the Church created by the Bergoglio pontificate persists. But to do anything about it,  we must first  understand this situation:  The Disastrous Pontificate is a major source book for that.

La Trahison des pères : Emprise et abus des fondateurs de communautés nouvelles

By Céline Hoyeau 

Bayard Editions, 2021

352 pages

The Betrayal of the Fathers confronts a crisis that has been simmering within the Church for decades – namely, the new spiritual “movements” and their all too frequent  deviation into spiritual and sexual abuse. Celine Hoyeau,  who works for the semiofficial La Croix in France, gives us a systematic review of the subject. It is a phenomenon that is especially  important in France. There, new religious communities were viewed as a potential savior from the decline and disintegration of the official Church that was already evident by the early 1970s. And although Hoyeau doesn’t say this,  their “conservative”  spirituality was at the same time distinct from and opposed to that of the mortal enemy of the establishment, the Catholic traditionalists. Therefore, the movements enjoyed from the beginning varying degrees of patronage from the official Church. And after 1978, Pope John Paul II adopted the movement concept as a preferred form of apostolate.

Hoyeau describes the sad story how movement after movement experienced disaster because of the exploitative activities of their spiritual leaders – in fact, the problem of abuse has infected the great majority of them.  The ensuing disclosures have shaken the Church in France. It is not that sexual abuse only occurred in the movements – on the contrary, there was probably more of it in the mainstream religious orders and in the diocesan clergy. But what was particularly distressing was the discovery of it in the new communities, inflicted at the hands of founders who often were revered as living saints. I should add that this book was published in 2021 – since that time much additional data has emerged supporting the conclusions of Hoyeau.

 In some cases, the French movements date back to the 1940s or even earlier. However, the big impetus for the nontraditional movements came in the 1970s with the influence of the charismatic renewal coming from American Protestantism.  The new movements had varying organizational structures and apostolates. Many originated in a specific charitable initiative. One, the “Office Culturel de Cluny” (OCC) had as its mission to restore Christendom through art and beauty! (pp.24-25) 1) They often feature hybrid liturgies and dress (e.g., combining Western and Byzantine traditions)  But nearly all of them have an absolute, charismatic founder enjoying a near divine aura based on direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit and who obtains total domination over the members of the community. These in turn find it impossible to break from the psychological hold exercised by the founder and, willingly or not, become participants in his (or in some cases her) crimes.

Of course, the  same phenomenon and the same problems have emerged again and again outside of France. In Germany we have seen the KIA(Katholische Integrierte Gemeinde),  once patronized by Cardinal Ratzinger and which later had to be dissolved. Controversy has been swirling for years around Fr. Joseph Kentenich, the founder of the Schoenstatt movement – disciplinary actions which the Vatican took against him in the 1940s were only recently discovered.  I could of course also cite Fr. Maciel and the Legionaries,  Gino Burresi and the Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary….

And what of the United States? Previously I have made a comparison between the European movements and the American “Conservative Catholics.”  2) But what in Europe is the predominant mode of alternative ecclesiastical organization is less common here. On the whole, the new spiritual movements, although present for many years, have remained a subordinate phenomenon in the United States.  The Catholic Worker of Dorothy Day in the 1930s already had features of the later movements(e.g., an oracular, charismatic founder ). Yet the regimented centralized control and devotion to the leader found elsewhere seems never to have been effectively established. And this example shows that, in the American context, the focus early on tended to be on political activity. Much more precisely resembling the developments chronicled by Hoyeau, however,  is the story of Fr. Bruce Ritter and Covenant House in the 1980s.

 Considering branches of communities originating outside the United States, Opus Dei has developed a certain presence in the United States since the 1950’s.(although I am not sure Opus Dei views itself as a “movement”!) Much later,  the Legion of Christ and its affiliate Regnum Christi were gaining traction prior to the reign of Pope Benedict XIV. The Neocatechumenal Way seems today to enjoy more official ecclesiastical  patronage than any of the others. 

But in conservative Catholicism,  leadership and a sense of community  have been provided primarily not by the new spiritual movements, but by supportive (mainstream) parishes,by authors, TV programs, publications and political organizations, especially those involved in pro-life activity. Charismatic renewal also has had less influence  with conservative Catholicism compared to its role in the European movements. Perhaps that is attributable to the omnipresent Protestant atmosphere in much of this country. “Charismatic” activity would be naturally associated with this milieu, not with a Catholic culture the conservatives were striving to restore.

Hoyeau seeks to identify the root causes of the problem. She notes how after World War II many Christians converted their faith into a political hope of reconstructing the world. Between 1958 and 1980 the level of religious practice in France fell from 35% to 10%. Vatican II was supposed to stem the estrangement from the Church but it only accelerated after 1965. The Council’s emphasis on religious liberty indeed appeared to many as an official authorization to make one’s own judgments in matters of belief. (pp.57-58) Welcome observations from a writer at La Croix!

Hoyeau devotes considerable space to the psychological aspects of abuse in the new foundations. She details the circumstances – affecting both founders and their followers – which enable the founders to gain total control over their subordinates. Yet I don’t think this crisis  arose primarily from the psychological defects of those who create such communities and those who are attracted to them. Rather, as Hoyeau herself shows us, these “formless” communities are the product of a time of flux. Even before World War II, I would assert, the traditional  Catholic paradigm of clergy and laity, of active and contemplative religious orders, had started to grow “brittle,” and mixed groupings of clergy and laity, usually active in the world,  sprang up.  This became the norm for the new foundations after the Council. Interestingly,  Hoyeau guardedly hints something deeper may be involved in some of these new movements – that in certain of them a non-Christian (quasi-Satanic?) cult may have taken root over the decades. And we have since encountered in the books of “Tucho” Fernandez or in the reported doings of Fr. Rupnik things startlingly similar to what Hoyeau reveals of the practices of the French founders. Thus, the abuses Hoyeau sets forth have an objective theological, ecclesiological  and historical foundation. 

I cannot follow other aspects of the author’s reasoning, especially in the latter half of this book. In keeping with the bureaucratic nature of the Church, she looks to “experts” in various disciplines to show us a path out of the disaster. Some of these experts offer analyses that contradict what Hoyeau herself has written earlier in the book. For example,  as you might expect from La Croix,  one pundit even attributes the failures of the founders to the repressive sexual regime before the Council. Thus, even the failings of the post-conciliar creations are only attributable to the pre-conciliar Church! I also think Hoyeau does not adequately spell out the dangers of the concept of “spiritual abuse”  – an overly broad category which itself fosters the abuse of authority. But all at all,  Celine Hoyeau has done us a great service in clearly and comprehensively analyzing an ongoing problem and tragedy for the Church.

1. Like the Society of St. Hugh of Cluny?!
2. See The Society of St. Hugh Cluny, “The Culture of Totalitarian Ultramontanism”(December 15, 2023); “Catholic Traditionalism in the United States: Notes for a History Part 2” (March 23, 2014)

We read that the Archdiocese of New York convened an “emergency” meeting of the clergy, outlining to them the dire financial condition of the archdiocese confronted by sexual abuse claims. Parishes and schools will have to contribute to the settlement fund – or else the archdiocese willl have to file for bankruptcy.

Kelly, Keith J., “Archdiocese to Pastors: Raise Millions for Sexual Abuse Victims or Go Bankrupt,” ourtownny.com (4/25/2026).

Is it not characteristic of the Church that the archdiocese’s new awareness emerges only after a change in leadership? And that the new archbishop of New York was reportedly not in attendance at this meeting?

This article points out the real or potential impact of the financial crisis on the fate of historic churches in Manhattan. We have covered them in this blog : St. Columba, St. Michael, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, Most Holy Redeemer… I fear that the archdiocese will put more and more properties on the market to stave off disaster.

(Above) St. Joseph’s in the Village.

I recently decided to check out for myself the recently reported Catholic revival downtown. First, I visited  one of the epicenters – St. Joseph in the Village  – around 2:00 in the afternoon on a weekday.  I found it padlocked. The much-publicized  perpetual adoration chapel of 2023 is accessible through the rectory. Exposition of the blessed sacrament in this chapel is  8 AM – 6 PM Monday through Friday. However, a key card is necessary to enter. That can be obtained two or three days after registering for an account  and requires the presentation of “a state ID and proof of address (no exceptions).” 1) An article on this church indicates that key cards will be given to parishioners and NYU students. 2) So, I doubt if I will ever be able to see the inside of this chapel!  (This concern for security may relate to one terrible incident some twelve years ago).

St. Joseph’s, of course is open at Mass times and for confessions. But, as the archdiocese stated at the time it sold the original NYU Catholic Chapel,  St. Joseph’s parish has taken over the role of a university chapel. I applaud the good work the Dominicans seem to be doing here. Yet attending a somewhat exclusive chapel with restricted hours and access has not really been the historic Catholic parish experience. 

(Above and below) Our Lady of Pompeii.

I headed further south to Our Lady of Pompeii. It is archdiocesan  – even if in the care of the Scalabrini fathers – and open. Our Lady of Pompeii remains a fantastic example of Italian-American architecture and decoration. It is literally crammed with images, statues and devotions. And this is how it should be! Because this church invites Catholics and non-Catholics, even outside of scheduled Masses, to stay and linger for quiet prayer, contemplation and devotion. People do go in and out of the church,  although I found only two or three remaining in the church at any one time.

(Above) Shrine to St. Frances Cabrini, who had contacts with this parish. ((Below) Window commemorating her mission to the US. In contrast to the recent movie on Cabrini’s life, the window correctly emphasizes the role of the Scalabrinian order (whose founder, Giovanni Battista Scalabrini – now also a saint – is somwehat incongruously vested in pontificals).

(Above) Some more recently canonized or beatified holy men and women are also commemorated at Our Lady of Pompeii: at top, Clelia Merloni (1861-1930) (Beatified 2018).

Years ago,  I had even looked upon Our Lady of Pompeii as a potential basis of a future Catholic revival. 3) But that apparently is not to be. The stirrings of orthodoxy one could find ten years ago in the  bulletin of Our Lady of Pompeii have disappeared  – indeed, online I cannot find a bulletin at all. The archdiocese closed the  parochial school in 2020.  As these images show, even the dominant artwork of the church -the fresco in the apse, completed as recently as 1985 –  has now suffered significant damage.

(Above) Immaculate Conception Church.

Heading north to East 14th St., I came to Immaculate Conception parish. Now Immaculate Conception parish has not only survived but it (or its pastor) has absorbed or taken over the direction of six or so other east Village parishes – most recently,  Most Holy Redeemer. Until not too long ago,   the neighborhood of this parish (Stuyvesant Town)  was one of the last remnants of middle-class Catholicism on the island of Manhattan. Perhaps because of this heritage – and the closing of other parishes – the statistics for collections as set forth in the parish bulletin seem respectable by the standards of New York Catholic churches. However, just as at Our Lady of Pompeii, the parochial school recently(2023)has been closed. When I visited, Immaculate Conception church was open but only a handful of worshippers was present. 

(Above) Immaculate Conception church with “Catholic” altars and statues added.

(Above) One of the fine “Protestant” windows ( this church was constructed for an affiliate of Grace Church (Episcopal). (Below) An example of the much more recent inept “art” of the archdiocese.

Thus, my initial report on the revival is mixed. Two archdiocesan parishes are impressive artistically, remain open for prayer – but unfortunately, at least on weekdays, seem to frequented by relatively few faithful and otherwise show signs of decline. In contrast, St. Joseph’s, currently under the guidance of the Dominicans,  is achieving noteworthy growth – and garnering media attention. Yet is a relatively closed, chapel-like environment really representative of Catholicism? Perhaps the solution is to head north to the parish of St. Vincent Ferrer – combining the evangelism of the Dominicans with the most beautiful church in New York!

(Above) A noteworthy feature of the exterior of the church is this water fountain – dry as long as I can remember. (Below) A quote ( Isaiah 55:1) above the fountain.

(Below) The fountain commemorates a little girl who died in 1894.

1. “Sign up to be an Adorer.” 
2. Caldwell, Zelda, “The Holy Spirit is Moving in Manhattan,” National Catholic Register (4/5/2026)
3.  The Society of St. Hugh of Cluny, The Churches of New York LXXVIII: “The Italians of Greenwich Village…”

(All accessed 4/26/2026)

“The program will display the dizzying range of music that coexisted in one place a one time.”

Cifras nuevas presents music from the 16th and 17th centuries for the duo of harp and guitar or vihuela. Widely attested to in European iconography and Latin American folkloric traditions, this combination of instruments performed music ranging from ornamented canto llano to dances of African origin. The first half of our program will feature sacred works and instrumental fantasies from the 16th century, including Luis Venegas de Henestrosa’s setting of the “Ave maris stella.” The second half will explore the preludes and dances of the 17th century, spotlighting the dual influences of Italian harmonic innovations and the rhythms of Spain’s colonial possessions.

Two parishes, in two boroughs of the same city, in two dioceses of the same Church. In a Catholic parish (and school)of the Brooklyn Diocese, a teacher and music director loses his positions becuse he has married a man. In a parish of the New York Archdiocese – the very upscale Jesuit institution of St. Ignatius Loyola – the same teacher and music director is celebrated by the pastor and a not insignificant congregation:

Murphy, Fiona, “A Catholic school teacher was fired after he married a man. Now, a church debuts his film,” National Catholic Reporter (3/29/2026)

Two parishes, two boroughs, two dioceses. And two religions?

Thanks to the NCR for the reporting.

Great News from the Lower East Side Preservation Initiative (LESPI)- the historic church of St. Mary’s has been landmarked! There had been rumors that the Archdiocese was closing it.

Wonderful news! On Tuesday, the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) Commissioners voted unanimously to designate the Church of St. Mary on Grand Street an Individual Landmark. Although public testimony was not allowed — the Commissioners heard public testimony at the March 9 public hearing — a crowd of supporters was there to witness the vote. Once the church’s landmark designation was declared final, the crowd broke out in enthusiastic applause.Constructed in 1833, St. Mary’s has served its Lower East Side congregation — first Irish immigrants, then Germans, Latinos, Asians and others — continuously for almost 200 years.

News from Lespi (4/9/2026). See also:

LItvak, Ed, “Landmarks Preservation Commission Designates Church of Saint Mary as an Individual Landmark,” The Lo-Down: News from the Lower East Side (4/7/2026)

St. Mary’s is one of the oldest Catholic parishes – and one of the oldest Catholic church buildings – in New York City. We previously described it here:

“The Churches of New York XXIV: In the Beginning,” The Society of St.Hugh of Cluny (4/26/2012)

I have just seen this article in the First Things Daily Newsletter of April 8^th, 2026:

Parks, Jillian, “Looking for the Real Catholic Church in New York City”

Jillian Parks is a “junior fellow” at First Things magazine – in other words, a recent college graduate. She describes herself as a “Reformed Protestant.” Does this mean, in the context of New York City,  a member of the Dutch Reformed Church?  Far more likely,  she is of the evangelical/charismatic persuasion. Now she has heard much about the rebirth of Catholicism among younger people in New York City and set out to test that image by attending Easter vigil services at the Church of St. Joseph in the Village.

St. Joseph’s has been in the hands of the Dominican order for a number of years and is linked to  the Catholic center at NYU.  Thus, one would expect a youthful crowd. However, this definitely is a recent development. Before the coming of the Dominicans, St. Joseph’s for decades was a test bed for all kinds of Catholic progressive experimentation: in theology, liturgy, art and sexuality.  For a description and brief history of this parish see “The Catholics of Greenwich Village – and those of NYU,” The Society of St. Hugh of Cluny (1/31/2016)

Ms. Parks is surprised to find that St. Joseph’s  interior lacks “the ornate woodwork, formidable stained-glass windows, vaulted ceilings and Baroque flourishes that I have come to expect in New York City Catholic churches.”  I would point out to her that the 1834 St. Joseph’s is a particularly old church,  built at  a time when Catholics utilized the same neoclassical style as did their Protestant neighbors. Moreover, after the Second Vatican Council this church had suffered a particularly drastic “purification” of its Victorian decoration, contributing to the current stark interior.

Now apparently the size of the congregation has been increasing. Indeed,  according to the pastor, on occasion the number of people present strains the capacity of the church – which would make St. Joseph’s rather unusual  among  New York City parishes.

Curiously, Ms. Parks states that “maybe due to a cultural distrust in journalism or a dissatisfaction with recent media coverage, nobody at the vigil wanted to speak to me about Saint Joe’s or his or her conversion experience.”  I suggest that there are very good and valid reasons to avoid talking with journalists! But Ms. Parks  says she overheard what a ”recent convert behind me” explained to his neighbor as to why he chose St. Joseph’s over Our  Lady of Pompeii church right down the street. It’s beautiful,  he said,  but it’s empty. For the situation at St. Joseph’s or at the other Dominican parish  St. Vincent Ferrer/St. Catherine of Siena is not representative of New York City parishes.

Ms. Parks did obtain an interview  at some point with Rebecca Krinzman who is described as having “received the sacraments” at St. Joseph’s in January. Although Ms. Krinzman claims to have had some acquaintance with Catholicism in Spain and,  later while at college,  attended Mass, when she came to St. Joseph’s, she entered the OCIA program. 

(Krinzman) cited the aesthetic coherence and cultural and political visibility of the Catholic Church as some of the reasons for the Gen-Z draw but pointed to its call for community and discipline as the more fundamental pull.

The claims that the Church makes and the discipline and sacrifice it requires were really what drew me in.

Other observations in this piece are more problematic.  Again, according to Ms. Krinzman, “beneath the many layers of irony and anemoia  among so-called TradCaths I believe the draw is rooted in a genuine and pure desire to recover something real that has been lost.” (“Anemoia” Is a recent made-up word indicating nostalgia for something never actually experienced (such a strange notion of nostalgia!))  As always, it is almost ritualistic for a member of a  “conservative Novus Ordo“ community to gratuitously take a swing against traditionalist Catholics, who are here indicted for dishonesty.

Ms. Parks found “the exuberant joy that takes hold of a Protestant congregation in celebration was largely missing from the vigil,  especially in its baptismal liturgy and congregational singing.  That which overemphasizes austere reverence is often drained of its vitality, and vice versa.“ Parks perhaps means the “exuberant joy “characteristic of evangelical or born-again congregations, which is not, in my experience, what necessarily prevails in mainstream Protestant denominations.  Otherwise, the four-hour plus Easter vigil liturgy seemed to her to be more of a penitential and ascetic exercise (which is indeed one aspect of it!)

What did strike her is the changing  illumination of the church, a feature inherited from Catholic tradition. As she put it:

While we journey through the mysteries of God’s work to save his beloved creation, the room was illuminated by candles representing the light of Christ that shines in his church, “a fire into many flames provided yet never dimmed by sharing of its light.” After the readings concluded the lights came on for good signifying the elucidating work of faith in our lives: faith that requires the same endurance patience and fortitude to see to its mystery as the mass requires of its attendees.

Now I don’t know what the liturgy and music at Saint Joseph’s actually are like. But I think it’s telling that, other than the above remarks, Ms. Parks says nothing at all about the music, the vestments, the ceremony, the homily or the readings . That would seem to indicate to me that the Novus Ordo service has not made a major impression on at least one otherwise sympathetic visitor.

Ms. Parks rightly points out that the fact of rising participation and conversions of younger people not just in New York City but in Europe has to be balanced against the much larger number of cradle Catholics who are ceasing to practice the faith. Thus, the future for a smaller group may be good, but the overall situation for the institution remains uncertain. 

As to the “church crawling,” the positive evaluations of St. Joseph’s made by Ms. Parks and her dialogue/eavesdropping  partners were entirely consistent with the attitudes of a very secularized American Protestantism: the charismatic qualities of the pastor,  the clarity of the preaching, the growth and size of the congregation, the “incredible”  community and the “unbelievable” support they offer. Yet the liturgy – the worship of God -was given short shrift! if  Ms. Parks will be continuing her survey of Catholicism,  I would suggest she visit Holy Innocents church in Manhattan which celebrates  the traditional mass. Or better yet,  get on Metro-North and come to Norwalk, CT. At the traditional Latin Mass at St. Mary’s,  she will experience an entirely different perspective on  the Catholic faith. 

UPDATE:

When I posted comments on JIllian Parks’ First Things report on young Catholics attending this year’s Easter Vigil I was unaware of the following articles on Manhattan churches increasingly attended by young Catholics:

Caldwell, Zelda, “The Holy Spirit is Moving in Manhattan,” National Catholic Register (4/5/2026)

Murphy, Fiona, “A viral Church ranking series is sending young Catholics to Mass in New York,” America (1/16/2026)

Indeed, Parks’s article seems like a reaction to the posts and videos of Anthony Gross, as described in the America article. He rated St. Joseph’s the “#1 Catholic Church in NY City!” And the National Catholic Register article makes some of the same points I did about the history and decoration of St. Joseph’s parish. But, seen in this context, Jillian Parks seems to have attempted a corrective to these overly enthusiastic dreams of a Catholic revival. And Parks acknowledges, both directly and by omission, the liturgical limitations of the Novus Ordo. Yes, the desire for the faith is there – but is the “establishment” Catholic Church capable of directing these feelings to the worship of God in truth? Parks seems to share the view of these commentators that Catholic Church and of the Catholic liturgy primarily offer subjective social and psychological benefits to the faithful.

To me, what is described as happening at the Masses of the New York Dominican parishes is yet another version of “reform of the reform.” Originating in the 1970’s-1980’s, this movement never acquired the necessary momentum in the Church. Pope Benedict, its main patron, was unnable to advance it at all during his papacy; Pope Francis expressly denounced both the movement and the very term. His acolytes, like Cardinal Cupich, who remain in high office, stilll do. These stirrings of the innate human desire for the worship of God, for truth and beauty are to be commended. But, without an objective foundation in truth and Tradition, such enthusiasm will share the fate of previous initiatives.

The Mass of Easter

The blessing of the font, the Baptisms and Confirmation