Is Kentucky's $9 Billion Bourbon Business On-the-Rocks?

 

What might have been? A brand new distillery, shuttered by its lenders.

Kentucky's best source for dependable bourbon news is the Lexington Herald-Leader, but they put some noses out of joint with a recent article about four unrelated but negative news events involving Kentucky distilleries. The article, and especially the headline, was criticized for being overly provocative and hyperbolic.

So why are we repeating it here?

For the same reason they did. Provocative headlines are intended to provoke you into reading the article or, in this case, subscribing to the newsletter that uses the Herald-Leader article as a jumping-off place for an analysis of the true state of Kentucky's bourbon business.

I won't even make you wait for the conclusion, since I've said this here and elsewhere. No, the bourbon business is not collapsing, but the so-called "bourbon boom" has slowed down considerably. The industry faces serious challenges. Most affected are the newcomers like Garrard County Distilling (pictured). They had barely begun to make whiskey when their lender shut them down.

The Bourbon Country Reader is a one-of-a-kind newsletter from the same source as this blog. But it is not the same content. The Reader is news, history, and analysis of American whiskey you won't find anywhere else. It is the oldest publication devoted entirely to American whiskey.

If you enjoy the writing you find here at The Chuck Cowdery Blog, there is a good chance you will enjoy The Bourbon Country Reader too when it arrives in your mailbox about six times a year. It is modestly priced and advertising free, unlike virtually everything else in your life. Subscribe now to rediscover the pleasure of old-fashioned words on paper, savored perhaps with a well-aged bourbon or rye.

The Reader itself is a bit of bourbon history. It debuted in 1994 with something like 17 subscribers. It has grown a little bit since then. The Reader has literally tracked the Bourbon Boom from beginning to now, when it seems to be entering a new phase. This new issue is #2 of Volume 23.

If you find yourself coming here, to the blog, for straight talk about the American whiskey industry, you probably should be reading The Bourbon Country Reader too.

Give it a try. A six-issue, approximately one-year subscription is just: 

$25 for mailing addresses in the USA. 

$32 for everybody else. (That is, addresses on earth but not in the USA. Interplanetary service is not yet available.)

The links above take you directly to PayPal, where you can subscribe securely using PayPal, Venmo, or any major credit card.

If you are unfamiliar with The Bourbon Country Reader, click here for a sample issue. 

Also in this new issue, we tell a story about one family's legacy at America's favorite distillery, and we look at the contribution corn makes to whiskey types other than bourbon.

The Deal that Made Me a Catholic

 

Mr. and Mrs. J. K. Cowdery, July 1, 1950.

My mother’s family was Roman Catholic and devoutly so. My father’s family was, as he described it, “vaguely Protestant.” They didn’t go to church and didn’t talk about religion. He had, however, been baptized Catholic at his mother’s insistence. She never took him to church either and divorced his father and left when Dad was six.

That baptism proved crucial when my parents married. They wanted to be married by a priest in her family’s parish church. Her family was not just devout but active in the parish. Her father was friends with the monsignor. Because Dad was baptized, he didn’t need to convert. He just needed to start following the rules. He had to become a practicing Catholic. Attending mass every Sunday was the main obligation. He wasn’t interested. So, the three men negotiated.

Each man had one non-negotiable position. Dad’s was that he would not pretend to be Catholic. Grandpa’s was that the marriage had to be recognized by the church. Monsignor’s was that Dad had to agree to baptize any children and raise them Catholic. Dad agreed so Monsignor allowed them to be married by a priest, though not by him, and not in the sanctuary. Instead, they were married by one of the parish’s other priests, in the house next to the church where the priests lived. 

At Grandpa’s direction, no pictures were taken of the ceremony. Instead, the wedding party adjourned to the front steps of the church and all pictures were taken there, and at the subsequent reception at a local restaurant. Grandpa understood optics.

No one was entirely happy, but everyone was satisfied, and the agreement held. Starting with me, the eldest, all six Cowdery children were baptized and attended the parish school. Every Sunday, our mother dressed us in our finest garb and sat us front row center. Dad attended sporadically. When my sisters were born, twins, staying home with the babies gave Dad his excuse to drop attendance to zero. 

I’m sure that relatively quiet hour at home did more for his spiritual health than any church service.

America's Craft Spirits Industry Grows Up

 

Denver's Leopold Bros is an example of a
successful, independent craft distillery.

Many new non-distiller producers want to become distillers, or at least say they do. Some eventually build or buy a distillery, but many don't. The term “non-distiller producer” (NDP) is not intended as a pejorative. It was coined merely to distinguish producers who distill from producers who don’t. There is nothing wrong with sourcing. It only becomes a problem when a sourcing producer pretends its products are something they are not.

For consumers, the ‘maker or faker’ question remains unresolved. You can’t reliably tell who distilled something just by reading the label. While some store clerks and bartenders can help, most can’t. Usually the answer can be found, but it takes at least a little work.

As more craft-distilled and craft-adjacent products came on the market, an infrastructure began to develop. Bill Owens was first with the ADI. In 2010, liquor industry veterans Dave Schmier and Marty Duffy launched the Independent Spirits Expo, a tasting event to bring small producers of all kinds glass-to-mouth with consumers and hospitality professionals. All small, independent producers were welcome. It was up to them to communicate what they meant by ‘produced,’ but transparency was encouraged. Begun in Chicago, it spread to New York.

Gradually, the existing whiskey expositions and tastings such as those produced by Whisky Magazine and Whisky Advocate Magazine began to include more small producers. Templeton, Whistle Pig, and Stranahan’s got some of their first national exposure exhibiting at those events. 

Today, drinks festivals of all kinds routinely combine products from large and small producers. The adage holds true. Consumers don’t care about producers; they care about brands.

In 2013, the American Craft Spirits Association (ACSA) was launched as a trade association for craft distillers. Existing trade groups, such as the Distilled Spirits Council (DISCUS) and Kentucky Distillers’ Association (KDA), created membership categories for small producers. Craft distillers in New York, Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, and other states formed state associations or guilds of their own. 

In 2016, ACSA and its research partners released their first report on the size and economic impact of the craft spirits industry. The annual reports of the Craft Spirits Data Project (CSDP) draw a clear connection between craft spirits and job development, agricultural growth, and increased tourism. Its data is routinely cited in national business and trade journals. 

According to the most recent CSDP report, the number of active craft distillers in the U.S. grew by 11.5% over the previous year to reach a total of 3,069.

The ACSA defines “active craft distillers” as licensed U.S. distilled spirits producers who remove 750,000 proof gallons (or 394,317 9L cases) or less from bond. They market themselves as craft, are not openly controlled by a large supplier, and “have no proven violation of the ACSA Code of Ethics.”

As for sales, recent years have been challenging for the entire distilled spirits industry, including crafts. The most recent report is 2023 data. In that year, the U.S. craft spirits industry moved more than 13.5 million 9L cases, a decline of 3.6 percent compared to 2022. In dollar terms, the category reached $7.8 billion in sales, a 1.1 percent decline. Craft spirits also lost market share versus “legacy” producers, declining from 4.9 percent to 4.6 percent in volume, and from 7.7 percent to 7.5 percent in value.

One metric that increased in 2023 was employment. Craft distilleries in the U.S. had about 30,000 full-time employees in 2023, up seven percent from 2022.

Exports of U.S. craft spirits increased, reaching 179,000 9L cases, about a five percent increase. 

The declines, though small, hit hard because they are the first such declines since the CSDP began with 2015. Long range comparisons are perhaps more telling. Volume, which for 2023 was 13.5 million cases, was 4.9 million in 2015. Value was $7.84 billion in 2023, compared to $2.4 billion in 2015. That’s a 175 percent increase in volume over eight years, and a 267 percent increase in value.

ACSA puts the cut-off for ‘craft’ at 750,000 proof gallons per year. Within the craft segment, only a handful of producers release between 100,000 and 750,000 proof gallons each year, but they represent nearly 60 percent of the craft segment’s volume as measured by ACSA. 

Today, instead of a handful of giants, the distilled spirits industry has producers at every point on the size continuum. While the vast majority are small, the largest of the new producers are having a meaningful impact on overall industry capacity. Today, something like 15 companies make 90 percent of America’s whiskey at about 30 distilleries. A decade ago, it was 8 companies at 13 distilleries.

Once they became savvy lobbyists, craft distillers went after the law that had so infuriated their 18th century forbearers, the FET. In so doing, they undid a fundamental underpinning of U.S. tax policy for the last 232 years, the deliberate disadvantaging of small distillers.

In 2018, the Craft Beverage Modernization and Tax Reform Act (CMBTRA) lowered the FET from $13.50 to $2.70 per proof gallon for the first 100,000 proof gallons produced per year. Only a handful of U.S. distilleries produce more than 100,000 proof gallons per year. 

Due to expire on December 31, 2019, the rate was extended for one year, then made permanent in 2020. 

Although the CMBTRA represents a modest tax break for big producers, it levels the playing field for small producers.

Today you can regard the American distilled spirits industry as a small number of legacy producers still at the top (Brown-Forman, Sazerac, Suntory, Heaven Hill). Those giants still make most of the whiskey and other spirits sold. Below them are a growing number of smaller companies that did not exist 20 years ago.

We’ll end this review here. In some ways, “what is craft?” has become moot. Or, rather, it’s recognized as a subjective term having more to do with the way individual products are made, rather than the size of the producer. In some ways we have returned to the late 19th century, when there were thousands of producers, large and small, all over the United States. Consumers have many more choices, which is never a bad thing.

NOTE: This is part three of three. Part one is here. Part two is here.

The Rise of Craft Distilling and “Craft-Washing"

 

The former Seagram's Distillery in Lawrenceburg,
Indiana was the source of many "craft" whiskeys.

Craft distilling grew through the 80s and 90s, but slowly. It took off as the 20th century transitioned into the 21st. 

Other related phenomena were also occurring. Existing producers, now called ‘legacy,’ long moribund, finally saw exports grow in the late 1980s-early 1990s. By 2000, domestic whiskey sales were improving too. This was driven in part by growing interest in cocktails, especially pre-Prohibition and Prohibition-era cocktails that called for whiskey, often rye whiskey, a style that was nearly extinct. 

Consumers, especially young ones, were changing too, becoming more interested in locally- and artisan-produced products of all kinds, looking for variety and authenticity. Craft brews and brewpubs are everywhere now. Craft distilleries scratch the same itch.

When whiskey sales collapsed 50 years ago, it was in part because whiskey was viewed as an “old person’s drink.” It was a victim of the generation gap. By 2000, young adults didn’t know they weren’t supposed to like whiskey. They also didn't think "whiskey" automatically means "scotch."

America was ready for craft distilling.

In 2003, Bill Owens founded the American Distilling Institute (ADI) to encourage and support small distillers. Owens, from Northern California, came to distilling from craft brewing. He founded and ran one of the first brew pubs and eventually became a writer and publisher of brewing books and journals. 

Before he became involved in the beverage alcohol business, Owens was a well-known and highly regarded photojournalist/fine art photographer. In his most celebrated work, Suburbia (1972), he showed us the world most of us were living in as if we were seeing it for the first time. 

ADI was Owens’ post-retirement career. As with craft beer, he dabbled in the craft itself but mainly became a publisher and promoter, staging conferences, expositions, and hands-on workshops. Many craft distillery origin stories begin with attendance at an ADI event. 

With ADI, Owens had a new tool at his disposal that had not been available when craft beer was young, the internet. ADI hosted lively virtual discussions and information exchanges, welcoming participants from all over the world. A frequent topic: “what is craft?”

Owens approached craft brewing and, subsequently, craft distilling the same way he did his photography, with an evangelical zeal to share his often-unique personal vision. One of his first acts after launching ADI was to get in his car and drive to every new distillery he could find, taking pictures, talking to founders, and spreading the craft distilling gospel according to Bill. As time went on the industry would develop additional infrastructure, but ADI was first.

Back in the 17th century, the first American distillers made fruit spirits, then rum, and finally whiskey. The craft movement followed a similar trajectory. In addition to brandy, vodka opened doors for many but also caused problems, since it is so much easier and more profitable to just buy grain neutral spirit (GNS) rather than make it from scratch. Vodka is one spirit a factory can make better than an artisan.

At Greenbar in Los Angeles, Melkon Khosrovian and Litty Mathew showed that the best way to make ‘craft’ vodka is to buy GNS and put the ‘craft’ into natural and original flavor infusions. Others got to the same destination by making craft gin, similarly with sourced GNS but natural, often ‘estate grown’ botanicals.

Others glommed onto the fascination some people have with outlaw distilling, as dramatized on the “Moonshiner” TV shows. Legal moonshine, an oxymoron, found a market. The spirit itself is usually vodka, corn whiskey, cane spirits, or a blend thereof, often flavored and sweetened.

Inevitably, most distillers want to make whiskey. Some of the first craft whiskeys to catch the attention of enthusiasts were Old Potrero (Anchor) in California, Stranahan's in Colorado, Balcones in Texas, Hudson (Tuthilltown) in New York, and Woodstone Creek in Ohio.

Craft distilling’s sudden rise spawned a dark side known as ‘craft-washing.’ James Rodewald defined it in his 2014 book, American Spirit, as “labels designed to fool consumers into thinking that industrial products are coming from small, family-owned businesses.” 

As craft-washing spread, transparency became an issue every craft producer had to consider. “Are you a maker or a faker?” Savvy drinkers wanted to know.

When Templeton Rye debuted in 2005 with a mature rye whiskey, it was obvious they had not made it themselves, even though their packaging and marketing made it look like they did. They had a distilling license, but it is easy to look that sort of thing up and their license was brand new. The picture on their web site labeled ‘our still’ was clipped from a German still-maker’s catalog. Templeton’s President, Scott Bush, refused to admit he didn’t make the whiskey, nor would he reveal who did. 

Their story was that Templeton was the recreation of a famous rye whiskey made surreptitiously throughout that tiny western Iowa town during Prohibition and distributed all over the country by the criminal underworld. It was catnip for journalists. They even had a great-niece of Al Capone claim it was Uncle Al’s favorite.

The story never stood up to serious scrutiny, but the whiskey was terrific, a well-aged rye comparable at the time to Heaven Hill or Wild Turkey’s best. The origin myth might have been palatable if they had told it with a wink and a nudge, but they were always dead serious about it and engaged a whole town in their deception.

Eventually the Lawrenceburg, Indiana distillery now known as Ross & Squibb was revealed as the source. The whiskey, with an unusual mash bill of 95 percent rye and five percent barley malt, was created by Seagram’s as a blending whiskey. When the Templeton scam was exposed, Templeton settled several class action lawsuits for $2.5 million.

There is nothing wrong with bringing a product to market by sourcing whiskey. That has always been a way for entrepreneurs to create new products and brands. Just don't misrepresent it, especially to a customer who craves authenticity. We’ll talk about that more next time, as this looks like it will be at least a three-parter. If you missed it, part one is here.

The Obscure Origin of the Craft Distilling Movement

This booklet was published by the U.S.
Departments of Agriculture and Energy in 1982.

According to the American Craft Spirits Association, there are 3,069 active craft distilleries in the U.S. That number has grown about 10 percent per year for the past decade. 

Compare that to 50 years ago, when the number of licensed distilleries of all kinds in the United States, including industrial alcohol, fell to fewer than 100. Fewer than 20 of those made whiskey. Except for a few artisanal brandy distilleries, all of them were big. 

Before that, it was different.

The FET, the hated tax that sparked the Whiskey Rebellion, was repealed by Thomas Jefferson in 1802, reinstated briefly after the War of 1812, then reimposed in 1862 to fund the Union’s side in the Civil War. It has been with us ever since. 

With taxation came licensing, and larceny. The tax collection system was deeply corrupt from inception. Alexander Hamilton anticipated that, so he designed it to encourage large-scale over small-scale distilling. It would be more practical, he reasoned, to police a small group of large taxpayers rather than a large group of small taxpayers. He wasn’t wrong. Great Britain had experienced and addressed the problem the same way.

So, for the convenience of government, the beverage alcohol industry was pushed in that direction.

Even with that bias built into the system, the United States had thousands of licensed distilleries throughout the 19th century, and untold numbers of unlicensed ones. Until the second half of the century, whiskey-making was primarily an adjunct to farming or milling. Only after steamboats and railroads radically improved transportation did distilling evolve into an industry. 

In the late 19th century, there were still 6,000 to 7,000 licensed beverage alcohol distilleries operating in the U.S., many of them large even by modern standards. After 1900, as Prohibition picked up steam, the number of beverage alcohol distilleries rapidly declined until it reached zero on January 1, 1920, at least officially. 

Legal beverage alcohol distilling resumed on a small scale in 1929 to replenish dwindling stocks of medicinal whiskey. It resumed in earnest after Prohibition was repealed four years later. Many new distilleries were built in the 1930s. 

The reborn industry was not only licensed for tax purposes, but also heavily regulated for public health and safety reasons so, again, it was designed to favor large-scale producers and distributors and discourage little guys. 

This time it succeeded. Little guys were duly discouraged. After 1933, there were never more than a few hundred licensed distilleries in the U.S., almost all large. What small distilleries there were usually were attached to some other business, such as a winery or cidery that wanted to make a little brandy. 

Then came the Energy Crisis of 1973. As Americans became aware of their dependence on imported oil, the search began for domestic alternatives. Ethanol, which had powered some of the first automobiles, was an obvious option. Blends of gasoline and alcohol, “gasohol,” became a popular way to extend the petroleum supply using alcohol distilled from renewable, U.S.-grown feedstock, principally corn. 

In 1982, seeking to grow the still-nascent fuel ethanol industry, the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy teamed up to publish Fuel from Farms, a Guide to Small Scale Ethanol Production. 

The Fuel from Farms initiative encouraged farmers to set up small distilleries to produce ethanol from their grain or other agricultural products. This did not threaten food supplies, it argued, because American farms had much more productive capacity than they used.

Farmers would control the process. They could reduce their own fossil fuel use by converting farm equipment to run on ethanol. That way they could become energy self-sufficient.

Fuel from Farms streamlined licensing and regulation but made a stern effort to exclude beverage alcohol from the equation. It didn’t work. The ‘fuel’ part never took off, but farmers and others got the simplified applications and lower fees extended to distilled beverage production as well.

The first to take advantage of this new opportunity were several West Coast winemakers who wanted to make fruit spirits, such as Germain-Robin, Jaxon Keys (Jepson), Charbay, Osocalis, St. George, and Clear Creek. St. George then got into vodka. Clear Creek got into malt whiskey. 

Also in the 1980s, the Justice Department relaxed antitrust enforcement leading to consolidation in many industries, including distilled spirits. The big got bigger and fewer in number. Soon Jim Beam absorbed National Distillers and the corporate roll-up that eventually became Diageo acquired American whiskey makers Stitzel-Weller, Glenmore, Medley, and Schenley. 

In theory, when any industry consolidates into a small number of large players, that creates opportunities for smaller, more nimble competitors. In distilled spirits manufacturing, however, the barriers to entry were uniquely high because of alcohol’s post-Prohibition tax and regulatory regimes. Add to that the unique capital requirement of aged spirits production. 

Although federal regulations had become less onerous, most states still had restrictions, so many early craft distillers became reluctant lobbyists. States such as California, New York, Tennessee, and Kentucky, that already had active distilled spirits industries, were easiest to crack. 

In Kentucky and Tennessee, for example, the ‘big guys’ had already gotten the law changed to allow limited direct-to-consumer sales at their distilleries, to take advantage of tourism growth.

Some states, in revising their laws, followed the model and rationale of Fuel from Farms and favored farm-based operations. One was New York, where Tuthilltown Spirits founders Ralph Erenzo and Brian Lee were surprised to learn it was easier to start a farm-based distillery than the rock-climbing resort they had planned originally. 

Successful lobbying efforts for craft distilleries always emphasize economic development benefits. Distilleries can complement a community’s existing agricultural, tourism, and hospitality businesses. They create new jobs and pay taxes, often at higher rates than other business types. 

Nothing motivates politicians like the promise of increased tax revenue. 

Craft distilling grew slowly through the 80s and 90s. It suddenly took off as the 20th century transitioned into the 21st. (This probably is part one of a multi-part series. Stay tuned.)

The New Unicorns: a $20 Handle

 

Screenshot from the Binny's website, 5/2/2025.

Traditionally in the whiskey world, a "unicorn" is a whiskey that is highly sought but rarely seen. Usually, the term is applied to high end limited releases like the Van Winkle line, Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, and other expensive expressions that seem to appear only on the secondary market, at prices many times their MSRP.

This is a different kind of unicorn, also highly sought but rarely seen, a handle (1.75 L) of excellent quality bourbon for $20 a bottle.

I call this to your attention not because I expect or want you to clean out Binny's, but because this is a good example of something we'll see more of, starting now, as everyone in the distribution chain looks to blow out excess inventory.

I've written about this particular bourbon before. Binny's is the biggest chain retailer in Illinois, with 46 locations. Clark & Sheffield is their house brand. The bottle I wrote about in August could be linked to Sazerac, but house brands can and do change suppliers. That's not important. The point is that a good, fully mature bourbon at $20 for a handle is my kind of unicorn.

This is not a unicorn you put on a shelf and admire. This is one you put on the countertop and drink.

I was browsing Binny's website to see what kind of bourbon bargains presented themselves. This one popped right out. I suggest you do the same with your favored retailers, perhaps more often than normal, because I expect we'll see more of this kind of thing. Right now, Binny's also has handles of Evan Williams and Jim Beam White Label for just $2 more than the Clark & Sheffield. They also have nice mark-downs on handles of Larceny ($36), Maker's Mark ($43), Knob Creek ($52), Bulleit ($43), and Woodford Reserve ($60). The markdowns range from 14 to 20 percent.

The price on Maker's, at 17 percent off the regular number, reminds me of a time, maybe ten years ago, when Maker's briefly stopped producing the 1.75 liter size because demand was so far ahead of supply. They figured they could serve more customers by keeping the smaller sizes supplied. How times have changed.

This is what we can expect going forward, lots more deals. Nobody wants to lower prices permanently, but the right kind of promotional pricing will help producers handle the present oversupply, that and distilling a little less. These are adjustments. Bourbon is not crashing. This is normal. The last decade was not. 

We can do our part by taking advantage of good deals when they present themselves.

The products mentioned all come from major, legacy producers. What about the many new contract producers and their customers? What about crafts?

Recently, a 7-year-old bottled-in-bond wheated bourbon priced at $24.99 for a 750 ml caught my eye. It was an unfamiliar brand, but those are impressive credentials. I did a little checking. I learned it was a one-off private label created by an independent bottler for a national retail chain. The bottler got a great deal on a barrel lot from a contract distiller and packaged up a great deal for the retailer and its customers. Although the distiller maybe took a haircut, this sort of thing is good for everyone, especially we drinkers.

But you have to keep your eyes peeled.

On the other hand, a major craft producer just announced a limited time price cut on their flagship whiskey. They needn't have bothered. Nobody crosses the street for a 10 percent discount, not in this environment. Any professional marketer knows that. The crafts are new at this. They'll learn, though some may not learn fast enough to stay in business. 

For more on how to win in this brave new whiskey world, CLICK HERE.

My Popes

 

The seven popes so far in my lifetime.

My first pope was Pius XII. He died a few months after I took my First Communion. Our catechisms were old and the picture on the title page was of Pius X (1903-1914), but we also saw pictures of Pius XII and they looked about the same. As six-year-olds, we weren’t taught much about his history. 

What I remember most about my second pope, John XXIII, is not his elevation so much as the events surrounding the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), which John called but he died before its completion. It was presided over by my third pope, Paul VI.

Everyone in my world was excited about the modernization coming out of Vatican II and about our new Catholic president, also named John. 

Paul seemed bland compared to John, but he faithfully carried out the changes instituted by the Council. I was an altar boy. (I believe “server” is the gender-neutral term.) The prayers we had to learn were all in Latin. We faced the altar during mass, not the congregation. I remember well the transition to the mass in English, facing the congregation, and other changes. I was in high school by then, still serving occasionally, but more frequently doing readings. Instead of suits and ties we wore turtleneck sweaters and love beads.

I also sang in the choir, in the loft at the back of the church, with the pipe organ. I was kicked out, ostensibly because I got caught shooting spitballs, but mostly because I’m a terrible singer. Then we started to have guitar masses, initially playing in the loft with the choir, but eventually in front. I’m not very good at that either but was, apparently, good enough. I was, however, very good at the readings, so I was asked to do that more and more.

In the parish school we had the sisters of St. Francis from Joliet, and diocesan priests from the Diocese of Toledo. The parish had a Monsignor and three priests throughout my time there. They all taught at the school. We also had lay teachers, but all religion classes were taught by a priest or nun. 

I would characterize our education as humanistic. 

The school and parish were completely integrated. My parents were both from big cities, so they told us big city Catholic schools weren’t like that. Almost everything I did was connected to the church and school, like my Boy Scout troop, for instance. School dances were held either in the school’s gymnasium or the church basement.

What I remember most about Paul’s papacy was Humanae Vitae (On Human Life), his encyclical on contraception and reproductive ethics. I was, after all, a teenager at the time. My parents practiced the "rhythm method," the only form of birth control sanctioned by the Catholic Church. They wanted to stop at two kids but had six. After my sisters were born, I learned that Catholic birth control also involved finding a sympathetic Catholic gynecologist to prescribe a hysterectomy when a couple decided their family was complete. 

Paul had a long papacy, 15 years. By the time of his death, I had drifted away from the church. I was living in Kentucky then. I don’t recall ever entering a church while I lived there. 

Paul’s long tenure was followed by one of the shortest, John Paul I, who barely made it a month. His successor, John Paul II, my fifth pope, served for a phenomenal 26 years. I had mostly left the church by then but was never hostile to it and followed developments as they occurred. If I saw the inside of a church, it was back in my hometown for a wedding or funeral. After I moved to Chicago, I checked out the cathedral. It was close to my office. It reminded me of my church back home.

Benedict XVI was my sixth pope and Pope Frank was my seventh. New guy will be number eight. Let’s hope for another good one.