From the Atlantic Monthly, Andrew Greeley on the priestly generation gap

Stark differences exist between older and younger priests on many major areas of concern within the Church. The 2002 Los Angeles Times study reveals that priests of the Vatican II generation overwhelmingly support the idea that priests should be allowed to marry. In the study 80 percent of priests aged forty-six to sixty-five were in favor, as were 74 percent of those aged sixty-six to seventy-five. Only about half the priests under thirty-five, however, supported the idea. The study revealed a clear divide, too, on the ordination of women. Sixty percent of priests aged fifty-six to sixty-five, and at least half of those aged forty-six to seventy-five, supported the idea, but only 36 percent of priests under forty-six did. Significantly, even priests over seventy-five—whose views took shape well before Vatican II—were slightly more likely to support the marriage of priests and the ordination of women than were the young priests.

The lines are a bit less clear on questions of sexual ethics. According to the same Los Angeles Times study, about half of all priests reject premarital sex and homosexual sex as always wrong. But only about 40 percent of the younger generation believe that birth control is always wrong—a revealing failure of the Restoration efforts of the past thirty years, which have been fundamentally opposed to birth control.

Now, we can hash over the assumptions and conclusions of this piece, but first I want to comment on the relationship of its author to its content.

As a writer always seeking to extend her influence over the universe, I read pieces like this with great interest. When you get to a certain level of name recognition in the opinion-mongering business, it seems to me, there is a point at which all that matters is your name, and content becomes irrelevant. Big-time columnists regularly phone it in, clearly are dependent on research assistants to provide the data to which they only attached transitional phrases, if that, and use up 500 words of a 700 word column rephrasing what someone else said so they can react to it.

And now, in that framework, look at this piece. Is Greeley reporting on ANY of his own research in this piece? No. He mentions that back in 1970, he was involved in a study, and then the rest of it is based on the work of Dean Hoge and an LA Times study. Good God. Can I summarize the findinga of two other research studies and then get published in the Atlantic?