Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Anyone who seeks to have an impact on the culture is bound to be controversial: it comes with the territory. Moreover, this is not a job for wimps. Judging from the reactions that were garnered in 2010, it is safe to say we made our mark. To be exact, we ignited more than one firestorm, drawing much praise and much criticism along the way. The following is a summary of the highlights of the year.

After a fairly routine first couple of months, we were provoked into action following several weeks of stories in the New York Times that attempted to blame Pope Benedict XVI for the sexual abuse scandal. Though it did not succeed in bringing him down, the timing and the coordination of effort that was evident suggested that more was in play than mere reporting.

Lest anyone have any doubts about where I stand on the matter of priestly sexual abuse, I staked out a position early on when news of the scandal first hit the front pages of the Boston Globe in 2002. At that time, I was accurately quoted in the New York Times saying, “I will not defend the indefensible.” Nothing has changed since. Never will the Catholic League defend a priest who is guilty of wrongdoing, sexual or otherwise. But I hasten to add that we will always defend those who are unfairly charged with misconduct. Indeed, we will always defend the rights of priests when they are accused.

There were several reasons why we reacted favorably to the media in 2002, and unfavorably in 2010: in 2002, news stories about priestly sexual abuse were largely fair in their coverage; in 2010, we were treated not to new cases of abuse—the problem is nearly non-existent these days—we were bombarded with stories about decades-old cases. More than that, many of them were unfair in their accusations, never mind the invidious innuendos that colored much of the coverage. What bothered us immensely was that no other institution, secular or religious, was put under the microscope about cases of alleged wrongdoing that took place over a half-century ago.

The timing of the New York Times stories was also suspect: it came right after the health care debate that had absorbed the media for several months came to an end. Was this just an accident? No, they were ready to fire as soon as the coast was clear. Who are the “they”? Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times was fed much of her story by Jeffrey Anderson, the most notorious steeple-chasing attorney in the U.S.

The tens of millions Anderson has made shaking down the Catholic Church have largely come from obtaining priest personnel files from decades ago. Anderson is also a donor to SNAP, the professional victims’ group; he writes them a check, and they generate publicity. In this instance, SNAP officials just happened to be in Rome right after President Barack Obama signed the health care bill; they were ready to be shown on TV once Goodstein pulled the trigger with the latest files obtained by Anderson. Just like a well-oiled machine, out came old dirt about the Church.

We decided to do something about this outrageously orchestrated news story. What motivated us to take out an op-ed page ad in the New York Times was the extent to which the newspaper tried to trace old cases of alleged abuse to the Vatican. Before Joseph Ratzinger became pope, he had almost nothing to do with policing instances of sexual abuse, yet the Times tried to convince readers that in his role as the theological right-hand man to Pope John Paul II, he was somehow responsible for what happened. Not until the last few years of John Paul’s tenure did Cardinal Ratzinger have any say over these matters, and the record shows that he acted with dispatch once given the reins.

Our summer was particularly hot in New York in 2010, and not just in terms of the heat index. Things reached the boiling point when we staged a huge street demonstration against Anthony Malkin, owner of the Empire State Building, for disrespecting Mother Teresa. Over 3,000 Catholics turned out to protest Malkin’s decision not to afford the saintly nun the same kind of honor he has bestowed on everyone from the Ninja Turtles to the Communist Chinese government. All we petitioned him to do was to light the towers in blue and white on the night of her centenary, August 26. We did everything right by the numbers, but he decided not to give her the respect she richly deserved.

It was a great night. The speakers represented the Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu communities, drawing on Irish, Italian, African American, Latino and Albanian backgrounds, as well as representatives from other ethnic groups. Not in attendance, but who were surely with us in spirit, were the millions of people all over the world who sang the praises of Mother Teresa on her special day. The words of encouragement we received, from cardinals and bishops in the U.S., as well as in India, meant a lot to us. Many of them also wrote to Malkin, expressing their displeasure with his obstinacy. At the end of the day, Mother Teresa was honored, if not by the Empire State Building, then just about everywhere else. Malkin was the big loser.

We just didn’t complain and stage a protest—we helped to raise money for the Missionaries of Charity. Moreover, we also drew attention to the many causes Mother Teresa championed. Furthermore, we won the plaudits of politicians in both the Republican and Democratic parties. Just as impressive, we inspired many public figures around the nation to light their municipal buildings in blue and white; the lighting ceremonies extended to Europe.

Would Mother Teresa have wanted all this attention? No. But then again, she never sought the limelight in the first place. However, the mission of the Catholic League—to stand up for the rights of Catholics—argues persuasively for a more public response.

Right after Thanksgiving, we braced ourselves for another round of the Christmas wars. Fortunately, we were ready. What we didn’t expect was that the atheist community would hit as hard as it did, and in so many cities. When American Atheists paid for a huge billboard on the New Jersey side of the Lincoln Tunnel saying Christmas is a myth, it struck many New Yorkers as obscene. One of the aggrieved, an elderly gentleman from Manhattan, came to us pledging to underwrite an appropriate response. I came up with an idea—to emphasize the reality of Jesus—and we arranged to have a huge billboard displayed on the New York side of the Lincoln Tunnel. Checkmate!

We also did something never done before: we sent, free of charge, a beautiful manger scene to every governor, asking that it be placed in a suitable public place. Many complied, thus triggering another round of hate mail from the so-called “freethinkers.” We paid for it because we didn’t want to give anyone an excuse not to display a crèche on public property at Christmastime. In addition, the Catholic League erected its own nativity scene, a life-size one, in Central Park; this year’s crèche was brand new.

What we didn’t expect to happen immediately after Thanksgiving was a collision between the Catholic League and the Smithsonian. After Brent Bozell’s Media Research Center exposed that the storied Washington museum was housing an exhibition featuring ants crawling all over Jesus on the Cross, we issued a news release announcing we were contacting every member of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees asking them to review the propriety of using federal funds to pay for the Smithsonian. The result: within hours of our news release, Smithsonian officials pulled the video from the exhibition, sending shock waves through the artistic community.

Though we never demanded the video be pulled, we were accused of censorship anyway. Besides, even if we wanted it censored, we don’t have censorial powers: that belongs to government. Yes, Rep. John Boehner and Rep. Eric Cantor spoke up saying they would look into this matter, but no one asked, or in any way threatened, to close down the gay-themed exhibition, much less shut down the museum.

Our position was quite simple: if it is wrong for the government to fund religious expression, it should be equally wrong for the government to fund anti-religious expression. In a nation that is 80 percent Christian, it is obscene, to say the least, to ask the taxpayers to fund a museum that features anti-Christian fare while receiving 70 percent of its money from the public.

The attacks we received for standing up to the Smithsonian were among the most voluminous, and vicious, that we have received in some time. Evidently, many artists have no religious affiliation, save for a dogmatic attachment to their work; they cannot countenance criticism from religious-minded persons. Their arrogance is appalling: they are the only segment of American society that believes it has an absolute lien on the public purse, yet rejects even the notion of public accountability. Well, they lost this round.

It wasn’t just in Washington where we did battle with the art mavens—we were busy in the fall drawing attention to the scurrilous “artwork” of Stanford professor Enrique Chagoya that was on display at the Loveland Museum in Loveland, Colorado. It showed a man performing oral sex on Jesus. After we gave this anti-Catholic exhibition national attention, a female truck driver from Montana ended the controversy by taking a crowbar to the Plexiglas case that housed it. No matter, as usual, the artistic community feigned victim status, never once even hinting at the fact that what they were defending was hate speech. Their narcissism is incredible.

Fighting with our cultural adversaries is nothing new, but when we lock horns with government officials, that is something more troubling. Government is not supposed to be hostile to religion, but often is. And because it holds the ultimate authority, infringements on religious liberty by its agents are all the more disconcerting.

There was a time not long ago when the term “health care bill” meant legislation designed to save lives. Today, it may also mean death. To wit: the health care bill that President Barack Obama ultimately signed contained provisions that allow for federal funding of abortion.

The Catholic League was proud to stand with the bishops. Our bishops, led by Francis Cardinal George, with the assistance of Justin Cardinal Rigali and Bishop William Murphy, did everything they could to delete the abortion-funding provisions from the bill, and they may have succeeded had Sister Carol Keehan of the Catholic Health Association not undercut them by publicly proclaiming that the bill was just fine. By claiming that the bill did not fund abortions, she gave cover to a piece of legislation that even some of its supporters admitted otherwise.

The bishops were also rightfully concerned that conscience clause protections might be jeopardized under all the health care changes that were proposed. The fact that at this late date in American history we have to worry about this fundamental religious liberty—not to be forced by the government to participate in acts that violate our conscience on matters of life and death—is a sad commentary on the state of our First Amendment rights. In the end, our side prevailed.

One of the reasons why the Catholic hierarchy had just concerns about religious liberty issues had to do with the nominations and appointments made by the president. One in particular proved to be critical: the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to head the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. After her nomination went nowhere in Obama’s first year, it was reintroduced in 2010. This immediately set off the alarms at the Catholic League. Why? Because in the late 1980s, Johnsen worked on a brief that sought to deny the Catholic Church its tax-exempt status. Given her cast of mind, we felt it only right to alert every Senator of her track record. On April 9, having run up against a brick wall, she withdrew her name.

The firing of a Catholic professor from a state university for the crime of explaining the Catholic perspective on sexuality, after being asked to do so, was one of the more Orwellian events of the year. The fact that the professor, Ken Howell, succeeded in getting his part-time job back from the University of Illinois (following a lengthy investigation), is cause for rejoice, but the fact that he had to fight this battle at all is distressing. While the Catholic League did not represent him, we alerted him to several pro-bono lawyers and helped to generate much publicity about his plight.

Celebrities are good at Catholic bashing, and 2010 saw no shortage of them. Sarah Silverman, Lindsay Lohan, Elton John, Jay Leno, Lady Gaga, Louis C.K., Matt Damon and Joy Behar topped the list; Leno and Behar being serial offenders. While we have no problem with many Catholic jokes, we do take exception when celebrities cross the line and/or hurl invectives with a palpable meanness. We are also struck by the duplicity of giving some groups a pass, e.g., Muslims, while relentlessly dumping on Catholics.

Talking about Muslims, we couldn’t help but notice the rank hypocrisy of the Washington Post. It refused to run a cartoon that might offend Muslims. Did the cartoon make a mess out of Muhammad? No. It never even depicted him. The cartoon showed children and animals roving about, and at the bottom it questioned, “Where’s Muhammad?” The Post, which had just recently published a clearly anti-Catholic cartoon, had the audacity to say that it didn’t want to provoke anyone by running the cartoon. Not only that, the same newspaper accused the Catholic League of censorship for simply exercising our First Amendment right to free speech by protesting the Smithsonian video.

There is obviously a double standard, something we have pointed out over and over again. But in addition to African Americans, homosexuals, Jews, Latinos and others, we can add Muslims to the protected classes. Indeed, they have now vaulted right to the top of the list.

We wish there were signs that our culture were turning around, but we don’t see any. Assaults on Catholicism, if not Catholics, are running at a fever pitch. It is our job to confront those responsible. We do so by putting the media spotlight on them, protesting in the streets, alerting our membership base, etc. While dialogue is not to be discouraged, anyone who thinks that talk alone can resolve issues grounded in deep-seated hostilities is delusional. Sometimes it takes a confrontation.

William Donohue, Ph.D.
President




Activist Organizations

Activist Organizations

January 12
In an article posted on TheWeek.com, Democratic consultant Bob Shrum took a shot at Catholic bishops for their opposition to abortion in the proposed health care bill: “Having abetted thousands of priests in molesting children, they’re now set on abusing health reform.”

We called for an apology. Shrum couldn’t fight the bishops on the merits of the issue, so he resorted to mud throwing to silence them.

January 20
The Freedom From Religion Foundation called for a boycott of the U.S. Postal Service’s (USPS) stamp commemorating the centenary of Mother Teresa. Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the group, led the campaign against the stamp citing that the USPS should not honor a religious figure. The USPS replied that Mother Teresa was selected because of her humanitarian work.

When asked about a previous stamp honoring Malcolm X, a leader of the Nation of Islam, Gaylor said, “Malcolm X was not primarily known for being a religious figure.” She followed this statement by dressing-down Rev. Martin Luther King saying he “just happened to be a minister.”

What really drove her hatred of Mother Teresa, besides her virulent anti-Catholicism, was the nun’s opposition to abortion. Gaylor accused the nun of making an “anti-abortion rant” during her Nobel Prize acceptance speech. In fact, the “rant” amounted to her saying that “abortion was the greatest destroyer of peace in the world.”

February 7
Eugene, OR
 – A coalition of religious freedom advocates called on Oregon lawmakers to repeal a ban on religious attire for teachers in public schools. This group, which included the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, was opposed by the Oregon ACLU which argued that allowing teachers to wear religious garb could lead to the indoctrination of children.

February 9
We commented on a report by the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) on sex education. IPPF used the terms young people, youth and adolescents interchangeably to refer to people who are between the ages of 10 and 24. In other words, 5th graders should be treated the same way graduate students are when it comes to their “sexual and reproductive health and rights.”

The entire program was based on a faulty assumption. IPPF stated, “The taboo on youth sexuality is one of the key forces driving the AIDS epidemic and high rates of teenage pregnancy and maternal mortality.” In the 1950s, there was no sex education in the schools, the pill was not commercially available and AIDS didn’t exist. Yet the out-of-wedlock birth rate was comparatively miniscule and sexually transmitted diseases were relatively rare. All because of taboos.

According to IPPF, “Fundamentalist and other religious groups—the Catholic Church and madrasas (Islamic schools) for example—have imposed tremendous barriers that prevent young people, particularly, from obtaining information and services related to sex and reproduction.”

February 16
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sued the federal government claiming that the housing exemption given to churches is unfair because they can compensate their leaders with tax-free housing.

March
Knoxville, TN
 – The anti-Catholic tract The Death Cookie by Chick Publications was distributed by members of the Conner Heights Baptist Church. The tract claims that the Church was founded by the devil and that Catholics worship a “wafer god.” After a protest by Knoxville Bishop Richard F. Stika, the pastor ended the distribution and admitted that he was “obviously not schooled in the Catholic religion.”

March
San Antonio, TX
 – A college atheist organization at the University of Texas-San Antonio launched a campaign, “Smut for Smut,” in which one could exchange a Bible for pornography.

March 10
Heflin, AL
 – A Christian radio station, Rejoice 89.1, left voice messages promoting a radio program “preaching against the Roman Catholic Church and telling people who the Roman Catholic Church really is,” and that “She [the Church] has killed more people than any other organization that has ever existed among mankind.”

March 11
San Francisco, CA
 – The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the use of the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance and “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency. Michael Newdow, a prominent atheist, challenged these phrases stating that they are unconstitutional and infringe upon his religious beliefs.

March 30
Madison, WI
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation asked that state officials remove references to Good Friday as an official state holiday.

April 27
Charleston, SC
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to the City of Charleston demanding that it remove a cross from the entrance of Charleston Fire Station No. 12. This was done after the FFRF issued a complaint in December 2009 that the same fire station displayed a nativity scene.

April 30
Colorado Springs, CO
 – The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) asked that the U.S. Army change the motto on the emblem of Evans Army Community Hospital; the motto reads, in Latin, “For God and humanity.” Mikey Weinstein, president of MRFF, said that the motto is a reference to the Crusades and could embolden U.S. enemies who want to portray the war on terror as a war between Christians and Muslims.

May 6
The Freedom From Religion Foundation ran a full-page ad in the New York Timesclaiming the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional. The title of the ad was “God & Government: A Dangerous Mix.”

May 11
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, along with other secular groups, signed a letter protesting the oath taken by workers of the U.S. Census Bureau because it ends in “so help me God.” The letter contended that the oath leads employees to believe that there is a religious test for this office and is a violation of the Constitution. The letter also said that “the oath has the effect of stigmatizing non-monotheists as outsiders.”
Along with the FFRF, the letter was signed by American Atheists, American Ethical Union, American Humanist Association, Atheist Alliance International, Camp Quest, Council for Secular Humanism, Institute for Humanist Studies, International Humanist and Ethical Union, Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, Secular Coalition for America, Secular Student Alliance, Society for Humanistic Judaism, United Coalition of Reason.

May 11
The 7-foot high Mojave Desert Cross, that was erected to honor American soldiers who died in war, was stolen less than two weeks after a controversial court decision allowing the cross to remain on federal land. The National Park Service claimed it wasn’t sure if the act was the work of scrap metal scavengers or those “with an interest in the case.”

May 19
The National Organization for Women called on authorities to investigate sexual abuse in the “male-dominated Catholic Church,” claiming that “girls as much as boys” are victims. Indeed, the latest data show that the more priests have access to girl altar servers, the more the offending priests abuse males.

June 15
American Atheists president Ed Buckner said that “religious conservatives like the Catholic League are behaving like Islamist fundamentalists” for opposing the proposed Comedy Central show, “J.C.,” that promised to mock Jesus.

June 24
Louisville, KY
 – Attorney William McMurry filed a lawsuit against the Vatican seeking to depose Pope Benedict XVI. McMurry contended that officials of the Catholic Church in Rome, including the Holy Father, knew about cases of priestly sexual abuse and then covered them up.

It is, of course, a staple of anti-Catholic thinking that every priest on the face of the earth follows lockstep with the orders from the pope. It is also the calling card of anti-Catholic thought that every instance of priestly wrongdoing is known to the Holy Father and his inner circle.

“I have yet to meet a Catholic, expert or otherwise,” McMurry said, “who does not believe that the Holy See has the absolute right to control the day-to-day activities of a bishop’s work.” Yet when even parents cannot possibly control the day-to-day activities of their children, only someone who is hopelessly naïve—or malicious—would contend that the pope is keeping tabs on them all day long.

Of McMurry’s three clients: one said he “thinks” the local bishop knew of his alleged abuse; another maintained that he was molested over three decades ago; and the third contended that a priest touched him through his pants pocket in 1928.

June 29
Washington, D.C.
 – The U.S. Supreme Court left standing a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that allowed an Oregon man to try to hold the Vatican financially culpable for a case of priestly sexual abuse that occurred in the 1960s. Though the priest was laicized in 1966, the plaintiff, who says he was abused, was pursuing the case because he wanted the Holy See to admit that the priest was an employee of the Vatican.

It should be noted that a month before this decision, the Obama administration sided with the Vatican holding that the Ninth Circuit erred in its ruling. We commended the Obama administration for being on the right side of the issue.

July 14
Chicago, IL
 – The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, released an article that justified the Gestapo-like tactics of the Belgian police’s raid of the Vatican. They defended the police claiming that the Belgian law enforcement team “cared more about vulnerable kids and wounded adults than protecting ecclesial authorities.” SNAP ended the article by saying that “History, psychology and common sense all strongly suggest that the official church bureaucracy played, and still plays, an enormous role in hiding child-molesting clerics.”

July 15
Washington, D.C.
 – The Women’s Ordination Conference’s executive director, Erin Saiz Hanna, issued a statement in response to the Vatican’s position on female ordination. She said, “The Vatican’s decision to list women’s ordination in the same category as pedophiles and rapists is appalling, offensive, and a wake-up call for all Catholics around the world.” She claimed that the Vatican is fearful of the organization’s growing numbers. This was a flagrantly inaccurate rendering of what happened. Just because this issue appeared in a statement that addressed sexual abusers in no way means that the Vatican was equating the two matters.

July 16
The Freedom From Religion Foundation released an article on the Vatican’s position on female ordination. It asked, “Why would any one wish to be on the side of a church which has institutionalized child abuse and its cover-up, and now compounds its injury to women by the insult of declaring that their inclusion in the priesthood would be just as bad as a priest raping a 12 year old?” The article went on to say “The reason the Catholic Church attracts (and apparently is run by) so many perverts is because it perverts human nature by devaluing women.”

July 22
Cranston, RI
 – The ACLU asked a public high school to remove a banner that had been hanging in its auditorium since 1958. The phrase on the banner, which begins, “Our Heavenly Father,” and ends with, “Amen,” was considered a prayer by the ACLU and some parents who complained. The ACLU claimed that the banner “violates the constitutional separation of church and state.”

July 23
Rogersville, TN
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation complained about a display called “Foundations of American Law and Government” in the county’s Justice Center. FFRF claimed that the County Commission’s Building Committee approved a display that was “heavily weighted with religious elements.” Among the religious elements were the Ten Commandments, a “historically inaccurate” painting of George Washington in prayer at Valley Forge, part of George Washington’s inaugural address that had “religious content,” a plaque with the words “Under God,” a plaque with the words “In God We Trust,” and two state resolutions that cited God.

According to the FFRF attorney, the basis for their complaint was, “The Ten Commandments have no relation to the ‘civic heritage’ of the United States. Our entirely secular Constitution makes no reference to them. Our leaders wisely shaped U.S. laws on fundamental principles of democracy and not on religious dogma.”

July 27
Dearborn, MI
 – Members of the Christian group, Acts 17 Apologetics, were arrested for proselytizing at an Arab cultural festival.

August 11
Tampa Bay, FL
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation displayed billboards around the Tampa Bay and St. Petersburg areas in Florida that sported the slogan “In Reason We Trust.” The group’s co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor’s reason for putting up the signs was, “We are offended to be left out of our national motto,” referring to “In God We Trust.” Gaylor said the phrase “excludes those who doubt or deny the existence of God, as well as those who believe in more than one God.”

September 9
Atlanta, GA
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation announced its plans to place 50 billboards advocating the separation of church and state in Atlanta. The billboards, paid for by the organization’s members, featured slogans such as “Imagine No Religion” and “Sleep In On Sundays.”

October 21
Chattanooga, TN
 – After a complaint from the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a public high school in Tennessee was no longer allowed to announce a prayer over the loudspeaker before football games.

October 29
Denver, CO
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued a complaint, claiming that Governor Bill Ritter’s proclamations recognizing the National Day of Prayer are a state endorsement of religion, a violation of the Colorado Constitution’s religious freedom clause. However, these arguments were dismissed after District Judge R. Michael Mullins ruled that it was perfectly constitutional for Ritter to recognize the National Day of Prayer.

November 16
Hanover, NH
 – A federal appeals court found that it was not unconstitutional to require schools to schedule voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and that it doesn’t force religion on students. This ruling came in a lawsuit brought on by a couple who claimed their children’s rights were violated by being forced to recite the pledge of allegiance because it says “under God.” The Freedom From Religion Foundation joined the couple to sue the local school districts and federal government, challenging the constitutionality of the New Hampshire School Patriot Act.

December 6
PETA exploited Pope Benedict XVI in an ad encouraging people to spay and neuter their pets. “Pope Condom” was the caption on the ad, with a doctored image of the pope holding a condom.

December 9
Georgia
 – Americans United for Separation of Church and State looked into how prominent the religious iconography is in New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in DeKalb County and Turner Chapel AME Church in Cobb County. Local school districts in those counties used them for graduations and Americans United made the claim that the prominence of the iconography violates the rights of students who are not Christian.

December 17
Phoenix, AZ
 – Phoenix Bishop Thomas Olmsted stripped St. Joseph’s Hospital of its Catholic affiliation for performing an abortion. In its push to coerce the Obama administration to force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions, the ACLU referenced this case as further proof as to why abortions are “needed” and condemned Olmsted’s decision.

December 21
Church Hill, TN
 – The Freedom From Religion Foundation wrote a letter to library officials in Hawkins County about the display of a cross that sat atop a Christmas tree. They said it violates the establishment clause of the Constitution.

COALITION BUILDING

In 2010 we were asked to join several efforts covering a wide range of issues: Joining a rally to end Muslim violence against Christians in Nigeria; Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons; Iran being elected to serve on the U.N.’s panel on women’s rights; organ harvesting in New York State; and we joined with friends to protest a proposed Comedy Central show.

Bill Donohue spoke at a rally in front of the Nigerian embassy condemning the actions of violent Muslim mobs that killed Christians in the streets of Jos, Nigeria. Donohue cited an incident in which an innocent woman was murdered by a mob of angry Muslims. Her offense? Crossing the street during Friday prayers.

The Catholic League joined a coalition of activists, led by Newt Gingrich, to protest Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons. Bill Donohue wrote an op-ed about this issue in the Washington Times, and we registered our support for the U.N. action against Iran. It is important to note that Iran is a nation which continually gets cited by the U.S. State Department for its horrendous record on religious liberty. The persecution of Christians and Jews, and the putting to death of anyone who converts from Islam, is bad enough. But when it is being done by a nation seeking weapons of mass destruction, it is cause for alarm.

Bernadette Brady, the league’s vice president, signed a statement denouncing the election of Iran to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women; it was signed by international human rights activists and women’s rights leaders. The open letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the appointment of Iran to this body “shocks the conscience of civilized societies.” There is something very sick about inviting a nation that oppresses women to serve on a U.N. commission on women’s rights.

We also joined with New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind and other Jewish organizations in defeating a bill that would have presumed consent of organ donation.

Finally, we enlisted in a coalition to protest a show that Comedy Central was considering, an animated production mocking Jesus.




The Arts

February 11 – 28
Tampa, FL – The Shimberg Playhouse hosted “Agnes of God,” a play based on the notoriously anti-Catholic movie by the same name. In the play, a novice nun gives birth in a convent and claims that the baby, who is murdered, was the result of a virgin conception.
August 14
Hammonton, NJ – The musical “Bare” ran at the Eagle Theater. The musical, set in a Catholic boarding school, is about two young gay lovers that the Church “fails to understand.” Variety magazine called the story a “tragedy that cannot be prevented by the sympathetic but theologically narrow-minded counsel of the school’s priest.”
September 11 – October 6
Loveland, CO – The Loveland Museum, a publically funded establishment, held an exhibit called “The Misadventures of the Romantic Cannibals” which featured a lithograph containing an image of Jesus having oral sex performed on him by a man. We contacted Colorado Governor Bill Ritter and the state legislature, asking them why tax payer monies funded anti-Christian art. During this time, a woman smashed the Plexiglas case with a crowbar and ripped up the artwork. Susan Ison, Loveland’s director of Cultural Services, said that she was “appalled by the violence,” while Bud Shark, the organizer of the display, denied that the work was offensive to Christians and was upset by its protest.
September 12
New York, NY – The SoHo Playhouse ran “The Divine Sister,” a play about a Mother Superior (played by a homosexual man) who is caught in a mix of anxieties, some of which include: sexual hysteria among her nuns, a postulant experiencing “visions,” and an old lover who is trying to pull her away from her vows. The New York Timescalled the play “aggressively family-oriented” while others remarked that it had a “convoluted plot” and was “an excuse for shameless puns.”
September 30 – October 19
New York, NY – Sotheby’s auction house hosted an exhibit, “Divine Comedy,” featuring 80 different works revolving around Dante’s Inferno. Most prominently among the artwork of the exhibit was the work of Martin Kippenberger, “Zuerst die Fuesse” (Feet First), which shows a frog in place of Jesus on the crucifix, sporting a mug of beer in one hand and an egg in the other. We responded to the offensive artwork by contacting  a Sotheby’s media official and asked her to explain why they featured Kippenberger’s assault on Christian sensibilities.
October 15 – November 13
Washington, D.C. – Matthew Black documented the activist group The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence in an exhibition called “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence: Identity Writ Large” at the Joan Hisaoka Healing Arts Gallery. The exhibit featured homosexual men from the anti-Catholic group dressed as nuns. The mission of the exhibit was to “use the art of drag to raise awareness for the LGBT community, educate about safe sex and AIDS, raise money for local non-profits and advocate for human rights.”
October 18
Los Angeles, CA – Chadmichael Morrisette and Mito Aviles decorated their home for Halloween with an anti-Catholic theme. Morrisette said, “This year, like all the years before, we typically put imagery and iconic things that are scary to use. So this year, the Catholic Church and the Pope are going to be represented on the roof of the house.” He included that “There’s going to be tormented souls around the Pope, young and old souls all displayed through mannequins.” To those who objected to the display he said, “They have [the] right to say we don’t like it as much [as we have] a right to put it on our roof. It’s all done in a respectful adult way, no one is mean and aggressive.”
December 11
New York, NY – “A Very Merry Christmas 2 You, Too” showed for one night only at the Laurie Beechman Theater. The show featured the Blessed Mother in drag who allegedly “sets the record straight” about the birth and life of Jesus Christ. The New York Observer was quoted as saying, “You could go to Irving Berlin’s ‘White Christmas’ or the Radio City Christmas Spectacular, but then how could you look at yourself in the mirror the next morning? Instead, try the holiday show that dares to dress our Holy Mother in drag.”
SMITHSONIAN CONTROVERSY
November 30
Washington, D.C. – The Smithsonian Institution hosted an exhibit that featured a video that showed ants crawling over Jesus on the Cross. After complaints from the Catholic League, the video was pulled. The ensuing uproar was worldwide: the artistic community exploded in anger at both the Smithsonian and the Catholic League for objecting to the video.
The video was part of an exhibit, “Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture,” that featured totally nude men kissing, men masturbating, sadomasochistic depictions and more. When the Catholic League wrote to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees asking them to “reconsider federal financing” of the Smithsonian, we were called censors and subjected to an onslaught of the most outrageously abusive speech, even receiving threatening letters from across the Atlantic, all through December.
December 3
Washington, D.C. – The Washington Post backed its critic’s interpretation of the offensive video by saying that ants on a crucifix “could be understood as an expression of the ‘hideous, heartrending loss of a loved one…’” Bill Donohue responded by informing them that it can also be interpreted as hate speech. He also pointed out that in October, the Post censored a cartoon because they said it “might offend and provoke some Post readers, especially Muslims.” The cartoon showed kids and animals frolicking in a park with the words “Where’s Muhammad?” The hypocrisy was sickening.
December 16
New York, NY  New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan wrote an article on his blog following the barrage of criticism targeted at the Catholic League for protesting the Smithsonian’s ants-on-Jesus video. His support was much appreciated and his kind words were respected. He said, “No one should doubt the high value and necessity of [Donohue’s] efforts, or dismiss him in crude terms. Even the recent high-volume critiques of his stand on this controversy exhibit nasty anti-Catholic canards. Keep at it, Bill! We need you!”
SMITHSONIAN MADNESS
Bill Donohue wrote the following piece for the January-February 2011 Catalystcommenting on  the Smithsonian controversy: 
By now, everyone knows that we objected to the video that showed large ants crawling all over Jesus on the Cross, but what is less well known is that this “contribution” to art was just one piece of a gay and lesbian exhibition. For the record, I did not know that gays were associated with this venture when I complained to a reporter, and even if I did, it matters not a whit whether the offensive video was part of an exhibition created by heterosexuals or homosexuals. But, of course, I was branded anti-gay anyway.
Andrew Sullivan, a gay writer, wrote, “Maybe what is truly offensive to Donohue is the notion that gay men might actually seek refuge in Jesus’ similar experience of marginalized, stigmatized agony.” That would not be easy to do considering I did not know this was the work of gays. Christopher Knight, the art critic for the Los Angeles Times, said criticism of the Smithsonian exhibition amounted to “anti-gay bullying,” noting that the criticism was coming on the heels of gay teens who committed suicide! Frank Rich of the New York Times said my “religious” objections (his quote marks) were nothing more than “a perfunctory cover for the homophobia” that drove my complaint. Don’t you just love the Freudian analysis?
It’s time these men grew up. Not everything is about them. So wrapped up in the issue of gay rights that they cannot fathom how anyone could object to irreligious art that is part of a larger gay exhibit without being anti-gay. They need to step back and take a deep breath. It is precisely the narcissism of people like Sullivan, Knight and Rich that allows them to see the world through one set of lenses, tightly fitted, condemning anyone who doesn’t share their view.
The gay art themes that I did not comment on, but which my critics adored, were nicely captured by Michael Medved, an Orthodox Jew and an astute student of American culture. The Smithsonian exhibition, he wrote, featured such lovely fare as “transvestitism, fetishism, sado-masochism, photographs of AIDS-ravaged corpses, full frontal male nudity,” and the like. All funded by you.
The complaint that I lodged—simply asking members of Congress to “reconsider federal funding” of the Smithsonian—led to forums organized to denounce the Catholic League in places like London, Los Angeles and New York. There were street demonstrations in New York and Washington, and many cities hosted the vile video in local art galleries. To these people, art is more than an expression—it functions as an ersatz religion.
Some liberal Catholics rushed to defend the exhibition. U.S. Catholic magazine said plainly that the ants-on-Jesus video was “not an assault on religion.” Catholics United, a radical left-wing group, accused me of “manufacturing” the entire controversy for my “end-of-the-year fundraising efforts.” When someone made a similar charge on radio, I responded by saying, “Not only did I arrange this whole thing, those are my ants.” Catholics for Choice, which specializes in Catholic bashing, weighed in against me and in favor of the video. And the National Catholic Reportersided with Frank Rich against me, asking its readers to “pray for the conversion of our brother William.” Sounds very fundamentalist to me.
Of all the issues involved in this controversy, the two that strike me as the most salient are the incredible insouciance shown to Christians offended by the art, and the equally incredible arrogance evinced by those who insist that their interpretation is the only correct one. Over and over again, we looked for just one of these art mavens to give us a genuflection, a quick recognition that Christians might justly feel abused by the ant crawlers. But, no, we were told we are too ignorant to catch its true meaning.
Stephen Prothero teaches courses on religion at Boston University, and he found the ant crawlers “deeply theological,” asking those who were offended whether they would be offended if the ants crawled on Christopher Hitchens. Yes, he actually said this. Another savant told us that the ants are “a metaphor for society because the social structure of the ant world is parallel to ours.” Now how about them apples! Charles Haynes of the Religious Freedom Education Project said that Washington Post art critic Blake Gopnik got it right when he said that the artist who created it intended to speak for his friend who died of AIDS. That went right over our heads as well. And an editorial in the Sacramento Bee said the art “could be seen as a modern take on the theme of divine suffering that has been the subject of Christian art for centuries.” Sure. And it could also be seen as hate speech.
Though I would prefer to go to a pub than a museum, and I strongly believe that the working class should not have to fund the leisure of the rich (they’re the typical museum-goers), at the end of the day I have more respect for what art is supposed to be than any of these charlatans. Indeed, their defense of the ant crawlers undermines their credibility. This Smithsonian madness proves it.
WASHINGTON POST CHAT
 
At the height of the controversy over the Smithsonian exhibition, Bill Donohue was invited by the Washington Post to enter an online chat with his critics. They posed the questions, and he chose which ones to answer. Below is a selection of the Q&A:
Washington, D.C.: Mr. Donohue, I can’t begin to say how angry and disappointed this censorship makes me.  My simple question/comment is this: If you don’t want to see this exhibit, don’t go see it. Why do you think that you have the right to keep me from seeing it?
Donohue: Nothing I did constituted censorship, nor did I even ask that the vile video be pulled. Censorship means the government abridges speech—all I am asking is for the House and Senate Appropriations Committees to reconsider federal funding of the Smithsonian. My principle is this: if it is wrong for the government to pick the pocket of the public to promote religion, it should be equally wrong to pick its pocket to assault it.
Fairfax, VA: What were the criteria used by you to ask that it be removed?
Donohue: The criteria I used were honesty and common sense. I know, as well as my critics, that if Muhammad were shown with ants eating him, Muslims would never allow the retort that it wasn’t meant to offend. So what was this vile video? A Christmas gift to Christians. It was hate speech, pure and simple, and it should not be funded by the 80 percent of the nation which is Christian.
Washington, D.C.: Will the committees consider withholding funding?
Donohue: I hope they will reconsider funding. After all, why should the working class pay for the leisure, e.g., going to museums, of the upper class? We don’t subsidize professional wrestling, yet the working class has to pay for the leisure of the rich. Not only that, because the elites don’t smoke, they bar the working class from smoking in arenas. This is class discrimination and should be opposed by those committed to social justice.
Philadelphia, PA: Actions like this make people more curious about the work—this spineless action by the Smithsonian will result in more people making an effort to see the work. Is that what you wanted?
Donohue: If someone wants to peddle hate speech disguised as art, let them do it on their own dime. Moreover, when the Chicago City Council ordered the police into a museum in the 1980s to take down a portrait of the black mayor, Mr. Washington (he was shown in his underwear), none of those branding me a censor said a word. I have never called for censorship, but I have asked legitimate questions regarding the propriety of funding hate speech directed at my religion.
Washington, D.C.: Ants crawling on a crucifix is no different than ants crawling on a rock. They’re both inanimate objects. Whether you’re a member of organized religion or not, anyone with an open, intellectual mind is able to understand this.
Donohue: Fine. Then let the ants crawl on an image of Martin Luther King next month when we celebrate his day, and let the taxpayers underwrite it.
Washington, D.C.: David Wojnarowics’s video was set in the days of the AIDS epidemic. He had been thrown out of his home when he came out, and had to survive in the streets. His art was about alienation, despair, rebellion and survival. When placed in context, you can see that this was not an assault on the Christian faith. Why do you deny us the opportunity for a conversation? The whole point of this exhibit was to confront and try to look behind the veil, not to change points of view but show that there are other points of view.
Donohue: Someone should have gotten to him earlier and told him to stop with his self-destructive behavior and to stop blaming the faithful for his maladies.
Contradictions?: You say that the government should not promote or assault religion. So what happens when the National Christmas tree is illuminated?
Donohue: Christmas is a national holiday and the Christmas tree is a secular symbol.
Pittsburgh, PA: How do you define the difference between art and anything that might be deemed offensive? The very nature of art is expression and individuality. How is this different than many other almost macabre images of the crucifixion, Jesus’s suffering, or cruelty of man against man—all depicted in art.
Donohue: People in the asylum are expressive as well, and so are children in nursery schools. Should we subsidize them as well?



Business / Workplace

January 4
Celebrity Cruises announced that it would no longer have priests on board to celebrate daily and Sunday Masses. We immediately followed up by questioning the cruise line about its new policy. Celebrity replied to our inquiry by saying, “Out of respect for our guests of all religious faiths, Celebrity has chosen to align the religious services provided for Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Interdenominational faiths effective January 4, 2010.” It added that religious services would be provided for “the major High Holy Holidays of each respective faith.”
What this statement failed to note was the reason for the new policy. The following is an excerpt from a letter Celebrity sent to Catholic priests affected by the change in policy:
“While we do meet the needs of many guests onboard by supplying a priest, we have recently encountered a great deal of negative feedback pertaining to the ‘selective’ support of one particular religion/faith. After many internal discussions, external research, and marketing investigations, Celebrity Cruises will only place Roman Catholic Priests on sailings that take place over the Easter and Christmas holiday.”
Celebrity spokeswoman Liz Jakeway defended the new policy by distorting the truth of what actually occurred. She said that the new policy is “built around our guests’ feedback and their suggestion that we ‘level the playing field.’” She failed to mention that Celebrity let bigotry—not parity—drive its new policy.
Similarly, one would never have known the truth of what happened by reading Cathy Lynn Grossman’s column in the January 26 USA Today. She made it sound as if Catholics had been cut a deal by Celebrity at the expense of others. She reported that some “were annoyed that Catholic clergy had ever been favored over other faiths that have daily or weekly prayers.” But there was no favoritism: there is a profound difference between non-Catholic clergy not requesting daily religious services and their being denied by Celebrity.
We advised all Catholics to shop around the next time they plan on taking a cruise, and not to waste their time checking out Celebrity Cruises.
January 22
At a fashion show at La Sorbonne in Paris, the clothing line Givenchy introduced some religious-themed items for its Fall/Winter 2010 collection. The male models wore clothes and accessories that were a showcase of Christian symbols. All but one of the items were inoffensive.
Designer Riccardo Tisci crafted “JESUS IS LORD” T-shirts, monastic hoods, clerical shirts, etc. But what crossed the line were his gold-colored crown of thorns necklaces: what was especially disturbing was that they were featured on bare-chested male models.
We asked Givenchy to pull the necklace immediately but received no response.
February
The travel website Kayak began a commercial campaign featuring two attractive nuns seductively looking at each other implicating a lesbian relationship. On February 15, after many complaints, Kayak CEO Robert Birge issued an apology stating that “it was never intended to be disrespectful to the Church.”
March
Showtime launched an ad campaign to promote the new season of its show “Nurse Jackie”; the ads were placed on billboards owned by Clear Channel Outdoors. The ad featured the lead character posed like Jesus with a halo of pills and bottles around her head with the phrase “Holy Shift.”
May 28
Rockford, IL – The Northern Illinois Women’s Center featured a decoration of a nun in a coffin and posters in its front windows taunting the pro-life community. A sign next to an entrance to the facility had a picture of Jesus extending a middle-finger with the phrase “Even Jesus Hates You” accompanying it.
Along with these signs and decorations, someone from the inside of the building displayed a sign as a priest and a seminarian were praying outside the building; the sign read, “F*** Your Perverted Priests.” Another priest had a sign taped to his car that read, “I Rape Children.”
September 9
The Catholic League was informed by a member that the Crow’s Nest Trading Company was selling an item called “Catholic Ring.” The ring was a sterling silver piece of jewelry inscribed with the words “Recovering Catholic.” Bill Donohue wrote to Crow’s Nest President, Douglas Tennis, requesting that the piece be removed from the catalog and website. In a letter of apology, the CEO of Crow’s Nest wrote, “Let me assure you that you have opened our eyes and caused us to look at the offensive merchandise through another perspective, and it has been removed from our line.”
October 30
Branford, CT ­– The Branford Green hosted a “Halloween Pet Parade” for the Dan Cosgrove Animal Shelter. At the parade there was a costume contest for the animals; the winner was a dog dressed as a nun.
December 2
Apple, Inc. decided to remove an iPhone app called the “Manhattan Declaration” after some  complained that its contents were “anti-gay” and “anti-choice.” The document is an authoritative statement initially signed by 148 signatories—all of them prominent Orthodox Christian, Catholic and Protestant religious leaders—affirming the sanctity of life, religious liberty and marriage (Bill Donohue was one of them). It is free of incendiary language and to label it bigotry is offensive.
December 14
New York, NY – A Catholic woman sued Concepts in Time, a Manhattan business run by an Orthodox Jewish boss, claiming that she had been banned from wearing her crucifix to work. According to her attorney, the woman was told to never wear her cross again, but her Jewish colleagues were free to wear jewelry with the Star of David.
MOTHER TERESA CAMPAIGN
 
In May, the Catholic League began a worldwide campaign protesting a decision by officials from the Empire State Building to deny Mother Teresa the same honor it had extended to virtually every world leader, event or holiday, namely, to shine the colors associated with the honoree from its tower on a designated night.
Early in the year, we found out that on September 5, the U.S. Postal Service would honor the 100th anniversary of the birth of Mother Teresa by issuing a stamp with her image. On February 2, Bill Donohue submitted an application to the Empire State Building Lighting Partners requesting that the tower lights feature blue and white, the colors of Mother Teresa’s congregation, the Missionaries of Charity, on August 26. On May 5, the request was denied without explanation.
During her life, Mother Teresa received 124 awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Medal of Freedom. She built hundreds of orphanages, hospitals, hospices, health clinics, homeless shelters, youth shelters and soup kitchens all over the world, and is revered in India for her work. She created the first hospice in New York’s Greenwich Village for AIDS patients. Not surprisingly, she was voted the most admired woman in the world three years in a row in the mid-1990s. But she was not good enough to be honored by the Empire State Building.
In the Autumn of 2009, the Empire State Building shone in red and yellow lights to honor the 60th anniversary of the Chinese Communist revolution. Yet under its founder, Mao Zedong, the Communists killed 77 million people. In other words, the greatest mass murderer in history merited the same tribute being denied to Mother Teresa.
We launched a worldwide petition drive protesting this indefensible decision and gathered well over 40,000 signatures. We also petitioned Anthony Malkin, the owner of the Empire State Building, to reverse the decision and urged our members to write to him. But all requests were ignored.
Every reporter who contacted Malkin’s office was hung up on. A PR representative hired from another firm would only say that he had been instructed not to say anything. Furthermore, when reporters from CBS sought access to Malkin on May 14, security guards escorted them out of his building.
Malkin called his decision to deny the lighting “final and irrevocable.” Apropos, we called for a demonstration on August 26 outside of the Empire State Building. A decision that we said was “final and irrevocable.”
While stiffing Mother Teresa drove much of the response, lying and arrogance associated with this event were also important factors. Click here see a copy of the application that we filled out in February; see also a copy of the application that was drawn up after our protest was lodged. In other words, they simply invented a new policy regarding religious figures so as to give themselves cover.
The support we garnered was wide. Media outlets all over the world carried this story, and the response was overwhelmingly positive. Liberals, conservatives, moderates—all were on board. So were people of every religious and ethnic affiliation; we were especially pleased by the strong response from Mother Teresa’s own ethnic community, the Albanians. Indeed, Malkin brought people together the likes of which we’ve never seen before.
In fact, few could believe that Malkin dug himself such a hole. While he was paying lawyers and consultants for advice, we reached out to a record number of bishops, priests, religious and lay leaders. Of special note was the warm reception we received from several bishops in India; they all had fond memories of Mother Teresa. We also gained new members at a fast pace.
In addition to holding a rally, we decided to conduct a positive PR campaign via our website: we posted the names and contact information of pro-life organizations in the New York tri-state area, urging people to make a donation in the name of Mother Teresa.
We had a lot of prominent people come to the rally. Moreover, we are pleased to note that not only did many New York buildings shine blue and white that night, but so did buildings in places ranging from Buffalo to Miami to Belfast. We encouraged everyone—no matter where they live—to wear blue and white on August 26.
August 26, 2010 will go down in American history as an important Catholic date. The rally proved to be a success, drawing over 3,000 people filling both sides of 34th street between 5th Avenue and Broadway. Seventeen notables spoke at the rally: politicians from both the Republican and Democratic Parties; celebrities, religious figures and New York icons; there were Albanians, African Americans, Indians, Irish, Italians, Jews, Latinos and others; there were Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Hindus. The diversity of the speakers proved our point: Mother Teresa transcended all demographic boundaries.
MOTHER TERESA PETITION
 
In the June edition of Catalyst, we provided the following petition for our members to sign and send to Anthony Malkin, asking him to reverse the decision of the Empire State Building and to light its towers to honor Mother Teresa:
Dear Mr. Malkin:
As the owner of the Empire State Building, we implore you to reverse the decision made by Empire State Lighting Partners to deny Mother Teresa the honor of having the towers shine in blue and white on August 26. On this day, the U.S. Postal Service will honor her with a stamp, marking the 100th anniversary of her birth.
Mother Teresa received 124 awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Medal of Freedom. She built hundreds of orphanages, hospitals, hospices, health clinics, homeless shelters, youth shelters and soup kitchens all over the world, and is revered in India for her work. She created the first hospice in Greenwich Village for AIDS patients. Not surprisingly, she was voted the most admired woman in the world three years in a row in the mid-1990s.
Last year the Empire State Building shone in red and yellow lights to honor the 60th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Revolution. Yet under its founder, Mao Zedong, the Communists killed 77 million people. In other words, the greatest mass murderer in history merited the same tribute being denied to Mother Teresa.
We look forward to your intervention in this matter.



Education

Education

January 17
Colorado Springs, CO
 – A wooden cross was placed at a prayer circle for Wiccans and pagans at the United States Air Force Academy. The reaction of the Academy was boilerplate. Air Force Academy Superintendent Lt. Gen. Michael Gould said, “We absolutely will not stand for this type of destructive behavior.” He continued, “I consider this no different than someone writing graffiti on the Cadet Chapel.”

Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and past graduate of the Academy, said that the cross at the pagan site was tantamount to having a swastika in the Jewish center.

We initially called on Congress to launch a probe given the past problems that the Academy has had with the rights of Catholics on campus. But we called it off once we learned that Gould had a good track record defending religious liberty. Nonetheless, we weren’t happy with his incendiary remark: he unnecessarily threw fuel on the fire. But we decided not to go forward given his past behavior.

February 12
Apex, NC
 – A middle school teacher was suspended for publicly complaining on her Facebook page that Christian students subjected her to a “hate crime” by leaving a Bible on her desk. She was later removed from the classroom and moved to an administrative position. On her Facebook page, the teacher said that she would not let this incident go unpunished.

February 22
North Carolina
 – Officials of the Department of Public Instruction altered a proposed civics and economics curriculum that compared anti-abortion laws to segregation. The proposed curriculum looked at three U.S. Supreme Court cases as examples of how the court upheld rights against oppressive regimes: Brown v. Board of EducationRoe v. WadeKorematsu v. United States. Bishops Michael Burbidge of Raleigh and Peter Jugis of Charlotte led the charge in having the proposed curriculum altered.

March 22
Washington, D.C.
 – The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by a high school student who sought to sue her school for banning the instrumental version of “Ave Maria” at her 2006 graduation. With the Supreme Court’s refusal, the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stands: the court agreed with school officials that the song was religious.

March 24
Stephenville, TX
 – We learned that Tarleton State University was to host a student production of “Corpus Christi” on March 27, the eve of Palm Sunday. Though it was not a university-sponsored production, we called the nature and the timing of the play, hate speech and offensive. The show was subsequently cancelled and the university president labeled the play “crude and irreverent.”

In the play, Jesus is depicted as the “King of the Queers” who says to the apostles, “F— your mother, F— your father, F— God.” The apostle Philip asks the Jesus character to perform oral sex on him, and at the end of the play Jesus condemns a priest for condemning homosexuality.

April 2 – May 28
Greenwood, IN
 – The ACLU of Indiana filed a lawsuit on behalf of a high school student to stop a student-led prayer at his high school graduation. The Greenwood High School senior class voted on the prayer and most of the students voted in its favor. The school board president stated it would not call off the prayer unless a judge ordered it.

On April 30, a federal judge ruled that the planned student-led prayer violated the establishment clause and that the student vote approving the prayer “trampled” the rights of the minority in the school. Despite the ruling, the class president of the graduating class thanked God during her speech to a thunderous applause.

April 8-10
Washington, D.C.
 – The play “Corpus Christi” was held at Gallaudet University during the school’s “Erase the Hate” event. The playwright, Terrance McNally, appeared a few days before the production and held a discussion about the play.

May 17
Schenectady, NY
 – A 13-year-old boy was sent home and suspended from Oneida Middle School for refusing to remove a rosary that he wore around his neck; the school stated that the rosary violated its dress code as “gang-related symbols.” A few weeks later, a judge issued an order allowing the boy to return to school and wear the rosary.

May 25
Montana 
– The ACLU of Montana asked that the Board of Regents at Montana State University (MSU)-Northern apologize for the prayers that were offered during the school’s graduation ceremony; MSU-Northern is a public university. The ACLU viewed the prayers as a violation of separation of church and state and that by allowing the prayer, MSU-Northern had demonstrated “a lack of respect for its students, faculty and staff.”

June 3
Exeter, CA
 – Exeter Union School District officials buckled to the pressure from outside groups not to allow a student vote on whether or not to have a prayer at graduation. Instead the administrators held a moment of silence. The pressure was applied by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the Anti-Defamation League and the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

June 8
Enfield, CT
 – Following the ruling of a federal district judge barring Enfield High School from holding its graduation ceremony in a local mega-church, the Enfield Board of Education voted to fight the ruling and appeal to the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

June 24
New Haven, CT
 – High school students received their diplomas without the phrase “year of our Lord” on the document. The superintendent said that the phrase was removed so as not to offend anyone. We said, “It is unconscionable. Attempts to scrub clean any reference to our founding is a disservice to the students and their community. And to base this decision, in part, on the need not to ‘offend anyone,’ is disingenuous—it offends beyond belief the vast majority of Americans. This is political correctness gone mad.”

June 28
Washington, D.C.
 – In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the University of California’s law school did not violate the First Amendment by declining recognition of a Christian student group. The school withdrew recognition of the Christian Legal Society because it considered homosexual relations “sexually immoral.” In his dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the decision represented a triumph for the principle that there is “no freedom for expression that offends prevailing standards of political correctness in our country’s institutions of higher learning.”

July
Urbana, IL
 – Ken Howell, an adjunct professor who teaches courses on Catholicism at the University of Illinois, was fired for explaining to a student in an e-mail that homosexuality violates Catholic natural law teachings.

We made sure that Professor Howell had everything he needed to successfully challenge the school. We contacted him with the names of pro-bono lawyers and gave this story much-deserved publicity.

After a lengthy inquiry, Howell was reinstated. Nonetheless, the fact that he had to fight for his rights is a sorry statement on the academic freedom of Catholics in the third millenium.

July 21
Augusta, GA
 – A Christian student at Augusta State University, was told that she could continue her graduate work in student counseling if she agreed to enroll in a “sensitivity” program and reformed her views on homosexuality and didn’t let it interfere with her program of study.

July 26
Ypsilanti, MI
 – An Eastern Michigan University student was told that she could only continue graduate studies in school counseling if she changed her beliefs on homosexuality and agreed to attend “diversity sensitivity training.”

October
San Francisco, CA
 – The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine posted a poem about stem cell research that mocked the Consecration of the Mass. The poem was removed after the Alliance Defense Fund stepped in claiming that it “[mocked] the most sacred of Christian texts.”

October 13
Santa Barbara, CA
 – An elementary school principal filed a lawsuit against Goleta Union School District after being threatened to be fired for being in a video that promoted a prayer breakfast that praised teachers. The district moved to fire the principal on the grounds that his appearance in the video was “an illegal promotion of religion.”

December 2
Howell, MI
 – A junior high school student, Daniel Glowacki, was at the forefront of a national firestorm after defending a fellow student’s free speech rights and defending his Catholic faith.

Daniel’s teacher, Jay McDowell, wore a t-shirt as part of a national campaign against bullying homosexuals. On that same day, McDowell demanded that one of Glowacki’s classmates remove a confederate flag belt she was wearing because it offended him. Glowacki stepped in and defended her free speech rights, calling attention to McDowell’s t-shirt and said some may find its message offensive as well. When McDowell asked Glowacki if he supported a pro-homosexual agenda, the student replied that he was Catholic and did not. For that McDowell threw Glowacki out of the classroom and claimed, “If [Glowacki] was Catholic, he’d be or should be in Catholic school” and called the student a racist.

Glowacki retained counsel with the Thomas More Law Center, who believed that his constitutional rights of freedom of speech were violated.

December 22
Haymarket, VA
 – A group of high school boys who called themselves the “Christmas Sweater Club” who wanted to spread “Christmas cheer,” were punished for distributing candy canes to fellow classmates. They were told by administrators that the candy canes were weapons and one administrator said that “not everyone wants Christmas cheer. [Suicide] rates are up over Christmas, and [they] should keep their cheer to themselves, perhaps.”




Government

Government

January-August
San Francisco, CA
 – On January 20, a judge in a San Francisco court allowed attorneys David Boies and Theodore B. Olsen to submit e-mails they obtained between the director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the bishops regarding support of Proposition 8, the 2008 California proposition which affirmed marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Allowing such communication in a trial is unusual enough, but the purpose was even more invidious: to show that Catholics played a major role in passing Prop 8. The lawyers did the same thing to Mormons, offering more e-mail “proof” of their involvement.

Their goal was not to contest the First Amendment rights of Catholics and others—their goal was to put religion on trial. What they said was that religious-based reasons for rejecting gay marriage are irrational, and thus do not meet the test of promoting a legitimate state interest. They trotted out professors Gary Segura of Stanford and George Chauncey of Yale to testify to the irrationality of the pro-Prop 8 side. Chauncey was even given the opportunity to read from a Vatican document that rejects homosexual marriage.

The lawyers for the anti-Prop 8 side touted Segura’s testimony that religious groups which supported Prop 8 constituted 34 percent of the nation’s population, while only 2 percent of religions opposed it. A comment that was grossly misleading.

Far more than 2 percent of religions support gay marriage: Buddhism has no official position but it is well known that Buddhists in California worked against Prop 8; the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America supports gay marriage, just so long as the term “marriage” isn’t used; the Episcopal Church also opposes all state and federal bans on gay marriage, therefore putting it on the side of the anti-Prop 8 forces; Hinduism has no official position on gay marriage, though those who follow Hindu texts like the Kama Sutra are fine with it; Reform and Reconstructionist strands of Judaism support gay marriage; the Presbyterian Church (USA) is similar to the Evangelical Lutherans in supporting gay marriage just so long as “marriage” is not used; Unitarian Universalist Association is pro-gay marriage; the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches is pro-gay marriage; the United Church of Christ also supports it.

Second, over 100 faith-based organizations, listed on the website of Vote NO on Prop 8, support gay marriage and worked hard to defeat Prop 8.

Third, though there are many religions opposed to gay marriage, there is nothing analogous to the coordinated effort of the National Religious Leadership Roundtable—it enlists the aid of all the aforementioned religions, and even includes Quakers, Baptists, Eastern Orthodox and Methodist members.

 A few days after Segura’s testimony, Boies pointed out that Catholicism teaches that homosexual acts are a “serious depravity,” and that the Southern Baptist Convention labels them an “abomination.” He was asking the presiding judge to connect the dots between the identification of sinful acts and the sanctioning of incivility against the sinners.

The argument failed miserably. As the Church has long noted, there is a huge difference between condemning sinful behavior and condemning those who engage in it. It is even more preposterous to sanction incivility against sinners by the self-righteous.

On August 4, Federal Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, finding that “religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians.”

January 14
New Bedford, MA
 – When Massachusetts senatorial hopeful Martha Coakley, a Roman Catholic, was asked on WBSM radio whether she supports conscience rights for health care employees she replied, “No.”

Coakley said that if she were asked to consider a bill that would say “if people believe that they don’t want to provide services that are required under the law and under Roe v. Wade, that they can individually decide to not follow the law. The answer is no.” When asked by host Ken Pittman about the rights of Catholics who follow the teachings of the Church, Coakley offered the separation of church and state argument. Pittman then said, “In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.” Coakley conceded that point but hastened to add, “you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.”

January 20 – April 9
After Dawn Johnsen’s nomination to head the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel was sent back to the White House at the end of 2009, President Obama quickly renominated the anti-Catholic lawyer.

Most of Johnsen’s critics focused on her strong pro-abortion record. But we pointed out her anti-Catholic history.

In the late 1980s, she joined a cadre of anti-Catholics to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status, claiming the Church was guilty of violating IRS strictures because it took a strong pro-life position. The lawsuit failed.

Despite this information on her, the New York Times asserted that the “baseless objections” and “baseless concerns” of Johnsen’s critics should be ignored. We asked if it would it be “baseless” to object to someone who wants to deny Muslims the same tax-exempt status afforded Catholics, Protestants, Jews and others? Would not such a person be branded a bigot who is unfit to serve in any administration, especially in a high post in the Justice Department?

On March 4, we wrote to every member of the U.S. Senate asking the question: “Are you aware that Dawn Johnsen, who will soon be voted upon by the full Senate, sought to strip the Roman Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status in 1988?”

On April 9, our letter seemed to have paid off; Johnsen withdrew her name from nomination.

February 2
Washington, D.C.
 – At the National Press Club, Harry Knox, Director of the Human Rights Campaign’s Religion and Faith Program and member of President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, stood by his 2009 comments that the pope was “hurting people in the name of Jesus” because he did not promote the use of condoms as an effective means to control the spread of HIV and AIDS. Knox was asked by CNSNews.com if he stood by those comments and he said, “I do.”

February 25
Washington, D.C.
 – Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, was scheduled to speak at a National Prayer Luncheon at Andrews Air Force Base but the invitation was withdrawn by the chaplain’s office because Perkins had spoken out in favor of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy.”

We said that the decision to silence Tony Perkins, an ordained minister and Marine veteran, represented political correctness at a dangerous level. There are legitimate reasons to accept and reject the current policy regarding gays in the military. No one, therefore, should be censored from speaking at any private or public forum—much less a military installation—because of his or her views on this subject.

We contacted Major General Darrell D. Jones, Commander of the Air Force District of Washington, at Andrews Air Force Base asking for a probe into this matter.

February 26
Washington, D.C.
 – Several officials from the Obama administration met with representatives of the Secular Coalition for America giving people of faith a reason to wonder exactly where their interests lie with the Obama administration.

No one opposes men and women who are incidentally agnostic or atheist from expressing their concerns, even to the White House. The problem with this meeting was the profile of the coalition’s members and organizations. On the advisory board of the Secular Coalition for America are such activists as Robert Boston, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Susan Jacoby and Michael Newdow. Member organizations include American Atheists, the American Ethical Union and the Council for Secular Humanism. All of these persons and groups have a track record of open hostility to people of faith, and some have been downright bigoted in their assault on Christianity, especially Catholicism.

March 3
Topeka, KS
 – A bill in the Kansas House of Representatives that was initially introduced to repeal the sales tax exemption of all non-profit organizations was amended to target only religious non-profits. The bill would penalize the Catholic Church and organizations like Catholic Charities, as well as other religions and charitable groups. When this bill reached the House floor, it was fixed and the tax exemptions were kept in place.

March 4
Jefferson City, MO
 – State Senator Church Purgason introduced a revised version of a proposed sales tax bill; his original bill would have required private and parochial schools to collect sales tax on school tuition and Catholic Charities would have had to pay a new sales tax. Under his revised legislation, churches, charitable organizations and private and parochial schools were exempt from the proposed sales tax.

March 3 – May 11
Michigan
 – On March 3, the Catholic League filed a formal complaint with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission regarding anti-Catholic comments made by defense attorney Henry Scharg.

In a Wayne County Circuit Court hearing concerning a woman charged with smothering her newborn daughter to death, her attorney, Henry Scharg, sought repeatedly to malign trial judge Dan Ryan, accusing him of allowing his Catholic religion to color his judgment in the case. Not only did Scharg call into question Ryan’s affiliation with Ave Maria Law School, he sought to remove the judge from the case.

Scharg was angered over the fact that Ryan was taking vacation time to teach at Ave Maria on Mondays (the fact that Ryan rearranged his Monday schedule to accommodate Scharg undercut his complaint). On p. 10 of the transcript from the hearing, Scharg was quoted as saying, “This is the equivalent to an African-American man being on trial and the judge taking Mondays off to attend Klan meetings.”

Bill Donohue issued the following statement to the media: “Scharg has no business representing anyone. To compare an accredited Catholic law school to a racist terrorist organization is more than despicable—it constitutes rank anti-Catholic bigotry. Indeed, this remark is so egregious as to warrant severe punitive sanctions, if not disbarment. We will do what we can to see that justice is done.”

We lodged a complaint with the Attorney Grievance Commission of the State of Michigan. On May 11, we received note that the Commission determined that Scharg’s offense did not constitute professional misconduct. Nonetheless, we are pleased that Scharg was forced to defend himself in writing and that a formal complaint is now in his file.

March 14
Gilbert, AZ
 – The Alliance Defense Fund claimed that a town code barring religious assemblies in private homes is unconstitutional. A Christian church began meeting in a pastor’s home for Bible study and fellowship and were told by a town zoning official that church activities were not allowed in private homes.

March 26 – 29
Davenport, IA
 – The city of Davenport removed “Good Friday” from its municipal calendar and announced that the day would be renamed “Spring Holiday.” After backlash, the idea was overturned and “Good Friday” was put back on the calendar.

April – May 3
Hartford, CT
 – A bill seeking to extend the statute of limitations in sex abuse cases was introduced in the Connecticut General Assembly by Rep. Beth Bye, but never came to a vote, thus securing a victory for Catholics. This victory was in no small part due to our tireless work in educating the public on how HB 5473 was inherently discriminatory towards the Catholic Church.

As it stood, the bill would have done absolutely nothing to bring relief to those who had been abused by a public school employee save for filing a civil suit against the individual.

Contrast that with a child abused by an employee of a Catholic school. Not only would the victim be able to file a suit against the individual, but the victim could then file suit against the diocese thus costing the Church millions of dollars.

As is the case in other states, public entities enjoy sovereign immunity from such claims and cannot be sued for damages unless a bill specifically authorizes it. Accordingly, we called Bye’s bluff: we said to make it inclusive of all institutions, public as well as private, or pull it.

We heard nothing from the teachers’ unions and the other lobbyists for the public schools. They knew that if the statute of limitations was eliminated in cases of childhood sexual abuse that took place in public schools, many former administrators and teachers—to say nothing of current school districts—would be forced to face the fire. We said that justice demands that they suffer the same fate of those in private institutions or they should withdraw the discriminatory bill altogether.

We were pleasantly surprised when we found out that State Senator Andrew McDonald, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, opposed the legislation stressing the importance that statutes of limitations have in the judicial system. We were surprised because it was McDonald, along with Rep. Michael Lawlor, who in 2009 drafted a bill “To revise the corporate governance provisions applicable to the Roman Catholic Church and provide for the investigation of the misappropriation of funds by religious corporations.” (The bill was pulled because the Connecticut bishops, the Catholic League and thousands of Connecticut Catholics fought it.)

Soon after we learned of HB 5473, we spoke to someone at Rep. Bye’s office and were told that this bill did apply to public schools and that there is a difference between state employees and public school employees when it comes to sovereign immunity. After we heard this we said that it was time to end the duplicity and have an equal playing field for everyone regardless if they are employees of private or public institutions. Accordingly, we extended a challenge to Bye: submit a bill that would repeal sovereign immunity for all public employees. Then, and only then, would Connecticut Catholics and Catholic institutions know that they would not be treated in a discriminatory manner in law.

Following our challenge to Bye, Voice of the Faithful in the Diocese of Bridgeport sent a letter to Connecticut lawmakers unjustly condemning the bishops for seeking to “mislead, mischaracterize and spin the facts in an effort to preserve their temporal, rather than spiritual authority.” In doing so, the group went way beyond the pale for even a dissident Catholic group—it portrayed an animus so vile as to rival the antics of rank anti-Catholics.

We wrote to the Connecticut Legislature and let them know that the Connecticut bishops speak for the Church in the state, noting that some Catholics were falsely positioning themselves as being legitimate competitors to the voice of the bishops and that Voice of the Faithful were the most irresponsible. We said: “To be sure, lay Catholics have a right to speak to all public policy issues that touch on the affairs of the Catholic Church. But no lay Catholic organization has the right to portray itself as a substitute to the canonical authority of the bishops. That is what Voice of the Faithful has done.”

We respectfully asked the lawmakers to weigh the real-life concerns of the bishops regarding the draconian implications of the bill. We also asked that they not be distracted by those who harbor an agenda of their own.

On May 3 our work paid off: proponents of the bill announced that there were not enough votes in the House or Senate to push the bill forward.

April 14
Harry Knox lashed out at Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone for his comments regarding homosexual priests and the sex abuse crisis. Knox said, “As pastor he should be spending night and day seeking to heal the wounds inflicted by the Church on the victims of pedophile priests.” Knox, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, also accused the cardinal of “diverting attention away from decades of Vatican cover-ups of pedophile behavior.” In 2009, we called on Knox to be ousted by the Obama administration for his comments bashing the pope. We did so again.

June
We filed an amicus brief with the Pacific Justice Institute appealing a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that denied standing to the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI) in a free speech and association case. At stake was the right of the University of California system to reject high school courses in its admission process which have a religious viewpoint. By filing the brief, we hoped that the U.S. Supreme Court would hear the case and overturn the decision.

The more immediate problem was the right of ACSI to secure standing, or the right to challenge these decisions. We found it important that organizations like the Catholic League know that their members need not personally participate in lawsuits which effect their interests in cases like this one. (The Ninth Circuit Court ruled that ACSI had no right to represent its member schools.)

October 26
The Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota came under fire for their anti-Catholic mailer that was sent out a week before Election Day. On one side of the mailer was a priest, shown from his Roman collar down, wearing a button that read, “Ignore the Poor.” On the other side of the mailer, there is a statement criticizing Dan Hall, a Protestant minister who was a candidate for the state Senate, saying, “Preacher Dan Hall protects politicians—not the poor.”

Although the DFL released a statement defending the mailer, saying it “explicitly criticized Preacher Hall,” the DFL had deliberately exploited Catholic imagery to make a political point. It was a clear Catholic-baiting stunt.

December 2
Jon Lovett, a White House speechwriter, won the “Funniest Celebrity” award for making a joke about the TSA’s airport pat-downs. Lovett said, “it’s giving a way for, you know, defrocked priests to get their lives back together, giving back to the community, lend a … Well, not lend a hand, but you know.”




Media

Media

Archbishop Dolan’s Critics Freak Out

In November, following the election of Archbishop Timothy Dolan as the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, critics of the New York archbishop went ballistic. Here are a few examples:

NPR was worried that Archbishop Dolan is “overtly conservative,” and Tim Rutten of the Los Angeles Times fretted about his “confrontational approach.” Dissident Catholics were upset as well: New Ways Ministry said the vote “sends an ominous message”; Call to Action also saw his election as “ominous”; Sr. Maureen Fiedler said “we now have our very own Catholic version of the ‘Tea Party’ movement”; DignityUSA concluded that Dolan’s election meant the hierarchy is “out of step” with Catholics. Similarly, the Human Rights Campaign, a gay secular group, said the vote meant the hierarchy is “out of step.” Not to be outdone, the website of the Tucson Citizen accused Dolan of evincing an “arrogant” attitude in winning (it is true that he was caught smiling).

SNAP, the professional victims’ group, opined that Dolan’s “winning personality obscures his terrible track record on abuse.” Marian Ronan of Religion Dispatches said his election is “not a good sign,” and her colleague, Sarah Posner, concluded—and this really is ominous—that “the bishops are targeting families with loved ones who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.” The Internet site Lez Get Real called Dolan “the Vatican’s spin-doctor,” and the website of Time had a headline which read, “More Bad News for Obama 2012: Catholics Elect Dolan.” Edgeboston.com picked up the AP piece, but chose to give it a new headline: “Catholic Bishops’ Vote to Mean Harder Church Stance Against Gay Families.” And atheist Susan Jacoby sweated over the fact that Dolan will be treated by the media “as if he is the voice of all American Catholics.” She needs to get used to it.

It was tempting to conclude that some in the asylum had escaped. More likely, it meant these are not good times for those who have sought—in many cases their entire adult life—to turn the Catholic Church, and America more generally, upside down and inside out. They gave it their best shot, but they lost. Maybe it’s time they retired.

Media Bias

The duplicity on the part of the media and civil libertarians ran deep in 2010, giving further credence to the “double standard” the media holds for certain protected groups.

We noted that the story of a nun who was accused of embezzling $1.2 million from Iona College was much more popular than the story about a rabbinical court in Brooklyn giving orders to its members not to report crimes to the police. The story on the nun was carried on the front page of Google’s “New York” section, Yahoo!, the Associated Press, UPI, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News, the New York PostUSA Today, Huffington Post, and dozens of other media outlets. The story on the rabbinical court was picked up by the New York Daily News and Gothamist.com.

Moreover, it is okay during election years for African-American ministers to endorse politicians in their churches, and it is okay to spend public funds for prayer rugs and foot baths for Muslims. The time has come to end the duplicity.

INTERNET

January 27
Sarah Posner, a writer for the website Religion Dispatches, was furious with the United States bishops for imploring Congress to move forward with health care legislation, but reiterating the call for protection of conscience rights and the unborn.

She spoke derisively of their commitment to “life-giving” health care; she argued that their real “motive” is to “normalize and expand their agenda on reproductive care”; she accused them of pursuing a “divide and conquer strategy”; she contended that they seek “to portray themselves as the heroes” after “they’ve absolved themselves of responsibility for holding the House bill hostage.”

February 19
Elton John told Parade magazine that Jesus was gay. “I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems.” We noted that Jesus was certainly compassionate, but to call Jesus a homosexual is to label Him a sexual deviant. But what else would we expect from a man who previously said, “From my point of view, I would ban religion completely.”

March 10
Writer Paula Kirby took shots at the Church in a piece for the Washington Post/Newsweek blog “On Faith.” Writing in response to the Archdiocese of Washington’s decision to cut benefits to future employees to avoid providing services to same-sex couples, Kirby wrote for the Catholic Church “nothing short of a theocracy will do.” She took an unwarranted shot speaking to the Church: “You want to influence public policy on sexuality and childcare? Fine. Get persuading. Though in the light of the endless stream of revelations about your own failings in these areas, I can only hope it’s a very long time indeed before anyone in a position of power repeats the mistake of looking to the Roman Catholic Church for guidance in matters of sexual morals and child welfare.”

March 22
Michael Wolff, a contributing editor for Vanity Fair, wrote a column bashing the Catholic Church on his own website Newser.com. Wolff began his column fairly stating: “In an age when all religions must be treated by right-thinking people with the greatest tolerance and respect, much of the reaction to the sexual abuse story in Europe and the Pope’s involvement with it, is, nevertheless, deeply and specifically anti-Catholic.” Wolff then proceeded into a bigoted rant: “There might not be a Church, as we know the Church, without sexual abuse. The Catholic Church equals sex abuse.”

April 19
In an interview with the British newspaper the Guardian, atheist author Philip Pullman was asked if he thought the sex abuse scandal would change the Catholic Church. Pullman responded: “I hope so…. In one way, I hope the wretched organisation will vanish entirely. So I’m looking on with a degree of dispassionate interest.”

April 26
On Beliefnet, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote about his upcoming visit with Pope Benedict XVI. In his piece Boteach discussed the sex abuse scandal and certain rules that the Church should adopt to stop the problem. One such rule was: “No priest should be allowed to be in alone with a child. Period. If a priest needs to speak to a child alone, the door must never be locked and there must always be the possibility that they can be intruded upon by outsiders.” What Boteach never mentioned was that since the mid-1980s the abuse rates have dramatically declined and the Church has been very successful at curbing recent abuse.

May
A video titled “The Pope Song,” performed by British comedian Tim Minchin, debuted on YouTube. During the song animated figures of the pope, bishops, cardinals, priests and nuns dance and in a few instances, the pope and cardinals expose their genitals. The “F” word is used repeatedly throughout the song with one of the phrases being, “f*** the motherf***ing pope.” We wrote to YouTube asking how this video could pass its decency standards, but were left with the explanation that it was not in violation.

May 17
On the Huffington Post, Rev. Dr. Cindi Love wrote an article on the failure of the bishops to take care of the sex abuse scandal. In the article she said that it appears that Pope Benedict XVI was “an enabler himself” of sex abuse.

She then lectured the Church hierarchy: “Pedophiles go free while Catholic priests are put on trial for disagreeing with the Church’s position on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their relationships. Extremist radicals kill doctors who provide abortions, and the church’s objections is nary a whisper. Innocent children still line up in Catholic schools and churches where the vetting process for leaders is ill-defined and inconsistently applied. There is much work to do and most of it must start with the Pope.”

May 19
On the Washington Post/Newsweek blog “On Faith,” Susan Jacoby wrote a misleading piece on the Church’s opposition to legislation in several states that would extend the statute of limitations in sex abuse cases. She noted that the Church is opposed to such legislation solely because it would hurt the diocesan finances, when in fact such legislation unfairly singled out the Church, while safeguarding public institutions.

She also noted that the New York bishops opposed a bill that would extend the statute of limitations in the state. What she failed to note was that because this bill also covered the public schools, unions representing the public school establishment and other public institutions opposed it.

May 19
On the Huffington Post, Clay Farris Naff wrote that the Vatican’s handling of sex abuse cases did not match Pope Benedict XVI’s apologies to victims. In doing so, he made over-the-top generalizations that insulted the pope. Ironically, Pope Benedict is credited by serious observers as doing more to bring about needed reforms than anyone else.

May 22
On the Huffington Post, Michele Somerville wrote a piece on the sensuality of the Church, the sex abuse scandal and the Church’s treatment of homosexuals. The following are a few of her comments:

• At the fore of every Catholic church in the world, one beholds an image of Jesus spread open, nearly naked on a cross. Creamy angels and a God we eat. Could a religion be more carnal, more sensual?

• It is inevitable that the tension between Catholic sensuality and its hierarchy’s commitment to repression should give way to perversion.

• Because perpetuating the idea that any sex outside heterosexual marriage is a sin allows the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church to ensure that Catholics continue to feel morally unfit to discern. It keeps Catholic women powerless and fecund. It keeps the priesthood a precious, over-trusted caste comprised of lonely, sometimes arrested, and, too often, not quite fully human men.

• The hierarchy mercilessly punishes members of its Church for the transgression of being born gay.

• For all we know, Jesus of Nazareth was gay.

August 9
On the Huffington Post, Michelle Somerville asked whether or not parishioners should continue giving donations to their Church. Her reasoning was, “People whose opinions on Catholic things I most value have exhorted me to stop putting money in the basked at Mass, and I am starting to think they’re right.” By not donating, she writes, that she doesn’t have to worry that her money is  bankrolling the “consiglieri who get bosses off the hook when they’re charged with pimping out children” nor will it contribute to the “Vatican snitches who spy on women in convents.”

August 11
In an article on RHRealityCheck.com, Angela Bonavoglia discussed an apparent “gender apartheid” in the Church. She stated that: “If ever there were doubt about the relationship between the Catholic Church’s spectacular failure to address the clerical child sex abuse crisis and the church’s glaring system of gender apartheid, the Vatican put it to rest in July. Engendering a firestorm of criticism, their new canonical guidelines for handling and punishing the most ‘grave crimes’ in church law revealed just how enraged the hierarchy is at women who dare to challenge them.”

September 9
AOL news writer, Paul Wachter, compared Pope Benedict XVI to Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a pro-terrorist anti-Semite. These comments came after CNN fired Octavia Nasr for praising Fadlallah as “one of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.” Wachter asked whether CNN should be consistent and fire anyone who praises Pope Benedict XVI since he “covered up the clerical rape of young boys and whose anti-contraception proselytization has contributed to the deaths of millions from AIDS.”

October 8
Movie critic Roger Ebert and John Nolte of Breitbart.com lampooned Salon.com film reviewer Andrew O’Hehir’s feverish take on “Secretariat,” a movie about the famed horse. O’Hehir called it a “honey-dipped fantasy vision of the American past,” and claimed that “it’s legitimate to wonder exactly what Christian-friendly and ‘middle-American’ inspirational values are being conveyed here.”

Most of the movie’s reviews don’t merit entry in the Annual Report, nonetheless, they revealed a phobia, at best, about religion. While O’Hehir’s review was the most apoplectic, others shared his view, among them were: the Sarasota Herald, the New York Times, and Newsday, all of which noted the apparent Christian overtones with distaste.

MAGAZINES

January 22
On the website of Esquire magazine, a column was published entitled, “Do Priests Masturbate?” The first line of the story read: “They do at my church—all over the place. Nuns, too. It’s fairly distracting. I’m thinking of lodging a complaint.” The article concluded by saying: “Some do confess their sins, but most seek comfort in the Holy Book, which advises a priest with unholy thoughts to ‘remain silent, but cleave nightly unto the spine of thine copy of Torso that thou keepest hidden in thine mattress ticking’ (Genesis 1:1).”

February
Actress Lindsay Lohan appeared on the cover of the Spring/Summer edition of the French fashion magazine Purple posing as Jesus with a crown of thorns on her head and her hands outstretched. Not only was the pose inappropriate, it hit the newsstands the week before Lent began.

March
Harper’s Bazaar featured a series of photos showing prominent designers being depicted in scenes from Pedro Almodovar’s films. One designer, Jean Paul Gaultier, was depicted as a nun and said, “I am the nun of the religion of fashion. Actually, a mother superior.” In the photo, as in the movie, the nun is sitting next to a scantily clad woman under a crucifix and a picture of Jesus.

May/June
The Philadelphia Trumpet ran a piece by Gerald Flurry that accused the Vatican of smuggling Nazis following World War II. Flurry also stated that Pope Pius XII “was by far the greatest Nazi smuggler” of the time and took a shot at Pope Benedict XVI for considering him for sainthood despite his “despicable history.”

May 19
On the AlterNet website, Harriet Fraad of Tikkun magazine wrote an article trying to figure out what was behind priestly sex abuse. She began by stating that the Church has had a “2,000 year history of sex abuse” and asked “why has the Church been plagued by so much pedophilia—predominantly homosexual?” The article then said the Church could “reasonably be taken to task for being an ideology that justifies the exploitation of women in the household.” The article also alleged that the “Catholic Church hierarchy (priests, bishops, cardinals and the Pope himself) has not yet been held accountable, publically [sic] and appropriately, for the crimes committed on their watch over several decades: crimes of molestation, rape, assault and yes, torture of children.”

June 7
Time ran a cover story on Pope Benedict XVI titled, “Why Being Pope Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry: The Sex Abuse Scandal and the Limits of Atonement.” The piece was strewn with misinformation and falsehoods.

The writers, Jeff Israely and Howard Chua-Eoan began the article by speculating whether the pope would apologize for the behavior of abusive priests and that the pope couldn’t apologize for fear of damaging the magesterium and papal power. Yet the article quoted the pope apologizing for such priests. Citing the pope’s apology regarding wrongdoing by some Irish priests, Time posited that he didn’t apologize “for anything he or, indeed, the Holy See may have done, much less the mystical entity called the Church, the bride of Christ.” But the article never addressed why the pope would apologize for an offense that he never committed: it just assumed that he was guilty and, worse, refused to admit it.

The article also asked: “Why didn’t the church simply report to the civil authorities the crimes its priests were suspected of committing?” For the same reason every other institution—religious and secular—didn’t. They followed the zeitgeist of the day and put the accused in therapy and returned him to his post when it was completed.

July 20
Time ran a piece by Tim Padgett blasting the Church on the subject of women’s ordination. Padgett described the Church as “misogynous” and that it is represented by a bunch of “homophobes wearing miters.” Padgett went on to say that denying women the right to become priests was evidence of its “increasingly spiteful rhetoric of bigotry.”

August 19
Bloggers for Psychology Today were asked to come up with plot-lines for sitcoms they would enjoy. The exercise was no doubt intended to be fun, but one struck a chord with Catholics. “Altered Boys” was among the winner’s list. The teaser boasted “Just think of what Hogan’s Heroes did for Nazi POW camps. We transpose that fascist hilarity from the waning days of WWII to the Catholic Church with a light-hearted look at pedophile priests. Join our crew of wacky (but clever) altar boys as they outwit the lecherous men who are constantly devising ever more outlandish plots to introduce them to ‘the holy sacrament.’ Timely, provocative, controversial: This one can’t miss!”

September 20
Sinead O’Connor wrote an open letter to the pope about the sex abuse scandal. She claimed that he was dishonest when he said that the Church did not act “quickly nor decisively” when dealing with the alleged misconduct of some priests. She said, “in fact church authorities acted extremely quickly and decisively, but in protection of rapist priests and the church, not of children.” She concluded by saying, “As long as the house of The Holy Spirit remains a haven for criminals the reputation of the church will remain in ruins.”

November 15
People magazine featured a picture of Harrison Ford dressed as a nun for Halloween.

MOVIES

September
Lindsay Lohan posed as a nun licking the barrel of a gun on a poster for the movie “Machete.”

NEWSPAPERS

February 19
In the “Weekend Arts” section of the New York Times, there was an article about a satirical comedy group, Capitol Steps, that was playing in New York City. The piece described some of the skits, none of which apparently dealt with Catholicism. Nonetheless, in a color photo accompanying the article, there was a picture of a man grabbing the breast of a woman dressed as a nun in full habit (three men dressed in bizarre attire were also in the picture). The gratuitous picture had nothing to do with the show’s description.

On April 8, the Portland Press Herald ran an article noting the groups’ upcoming performance in Portland, Maine using the same picture to promote the group.

March 10-18
Boise Weekly featured a painting of Sarah Palin on the cover dressed and posing as the Blessed Virgin. The painting also depicted Palin with devil horns, a gun in one hand and wearing an upside-down cross around her neck.

March 14
On the front page of the “Week in Review” section of the New York Times, there was a piece on health care titled, “Is Failure Forgivable?” Accompanying the article was a photo of President Barack Obama with his finger pointed upwards. Superimposed in the background was an illustration that showed an illuminated cross; a halo over President Obama’s head was also depicted. A small picture of the White House was shown at the bottom of the cross.

March 17
Pope Benedict XVI was portrayed covering his ears, eyes and mouth in a cartoon by Taylor Jones that ran in the Westerly Sun.

March 17
The Jewish weekly The Forward ran an article by Raphael Mostel in which he claimed that Pope Pius IX “earned a place” in hell for the “kidnapping” of Edgar Mortara in 1858. Mostel did not reveal the fact that Mortara was baptized because the Catholic servant girl in the household thought he was dying and in need of salvation. He was subsequently taken from his family because the Church, at the time, judged that a baptized Christian could not be raised in a Jewish home. Moreover, Mostel failed to note that Mortara developed a father-son relationship with Pius IX and even became a priest.

March 25
The Akron Beacon Journal ran a cartoon by Mike Luckovich showing the pope trying to divert attention from the sex abuse scandal by announcing that he would play in the Masters Golf Tournament.

March 28
Clay Bennett of the Chattanooga Times Free Press had a cartoon showing people walking into Mass. The church’s sign reads, “All Clergy Undergo Thorough Background Checks.”

March 29
The Times Herald ran a cartoon by John Cole saying that the pope was as deaf as the victims of Father Murphy in Wisconsin when it came to listening to claims of priestly sex abuse.

March 30
The Washington Examiner ran a cartoon by Nate Beeler showing a priest with a lip mark on his collar. A woman says to him, “Father! That better be lipstick and not Juicy Juice on your collar!”

March 31
The Hartford Courant ran a cartoon by Bob Englehardt showing Christ being nailed to the Cross with a nail shaped like the pope.

April 1
After being charged with defending Father Marcial Maciel in numerous publications, Bill Donohue replied to all of those who accused him; Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, sexually abused seminarians and fathered a child. In 1997, Donohue wrote a letter in the Hartford Courant taking issue with the newspaper giving credibility to some of Maciel’s accusers who said that he told them that he had papal permission to have sex with them. Other than Tim Rutten of the Los Angeles Times, who acknowledged Donohue’s statement, we heard nothing.

April 2
Mike Peters drew a cartoon that ran in the Foster’s Daily Democrat with the pope saying, “Here’s my church and here’s my steeple. If you’ve been abused…Just call my P.R. people.”

April 2
Paul Berge of the Philadelphia Gay News ran a cartoon showing the pope reading a paper with the headline referring to the sex abuse scandal. Behind him a cardinal is saying, “Let’s look at the bright side: we’re still allowed within 2,000 yards of schools, parks and playgrounds, aren’t we?”

April 4
Bill Schorr ran a cartoon in the Maine Sunday Telegram depicting a priest and a boy on opposite sides of the confessional. The priest says to the boy, “Forgive me, child…For I have sinned.”

April 5
Adam Zyglis ran a cartoon in the Buffalo News of the pope playing a shell game asking “Can you find the abuse?”

April 6
The Green Bay Press-Gazette ran a cartoon by Joe Heller showing Pope Benedict XVI plugging his ears while holding letters regarding the Father Murphy scandal and other pleas to remove abusive priests.

April 9
Cagle Cartoons ran a cartoon by Bill Schorr showing Hansel and Gretel arriving at a house made of candy with a smiling priest waiting at the front door.

April 11
The San Francisco Chronicle ran a cartoon where a father tells a priest that priests should be allowed to marry so that they could understand parents’ anger with the sex abuse scandal.

April 13
The Commercial Appeal ran a cartoon by Bill Day which showed the pope hiding people under his cassock with the word “Coverup” stamped on it.

April 13
The Times Union ran a cartoon by John DeRosier showing the Vatican throwing a nun off a ship to a whale labeled, “Child Sex Abuse Scandal.” The priest representing the Vatican says, “It’s for the good of the Church sister…”

April 14
Mike Thompson of the Detroit Free Press ran a cartoon that implied that the Church blamed its critics and the media for the sex abuse scandal.

April 14
Jeff Darcy of the Cleveland Plain Dealer had a cartoon showing the pope reading a book entitled The Coverup Bible by Richard Nixon.

April 20
Eugene Robinson, an editorial page writer for the Washington Post, wrote that “practically every day, there are new revelations of pedophile priests having been transferred to other parishes rather than being defrocked and reported to authorities.”
It would have been more accurate to say that every day there are old revelations of molesting priests, most of whom were homosexuals.

April 23
The New York Times ran a story about a case of alleged sexual abuse committed by a Chilean priest; the priest had sex with a 17-year old male and continued to have sex with him for 20 years even after he was married with children.

We asked, “Why would the New York Times try to sell this so-called abuse story with a straight face?” We came up with two reasons: it wallows in stories designed to weaken the moral authority of the Catholic Church, and it is so gay-friendly as to be gay-crazy.  The real news story here was not another case of homosexual molestation, it was the political motivation of the New York Times.

April 25
Clark Hoyt, the public editor of the New York Times, ran a piece that sought to defend the paper against Catholics unhappy with its coverage of the pope. In particular, he defended Laurie Goodstein’s story on Father Lawrence Murphy in which Goodstein reported that Murphy had molested dozens of deaf boys and left implications that Cardinal Ratzinger—now the pope—knew of the case.

Hoyt wrote, “In 1996, more than 20 years after Murphy moved away, the archbishop of Milwaukee, Rembert Weakland, wrote to Ratzinger [now the pope], saying he had just learned that the priest had solicited sex in the confessional while at the school, a particularly grievous offense, and asked how he should proceed.” (Our italics.) Weakland became Milwaukee archbishop in 1977.

Cardinal William Levada criticized Goodstein for trying to attribute blame to the pope for the Murphy case, “instead of to diocesan decisions at the time.” Moreover, we cited Weakland’s record: he not only sought to punish whistle-blowers─he ripped off the archdiocese to settle a sexual assault lawsuit brought by his 53-year old male lover. We added that because Weakland was a champion of liberal causes, the media gave him a pass for his delinquency in not contacting the Vatican about Murphy for two decades.

In a letter from the Coadjutor Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin, Raphael M. Fliss, to the Vicar for Personnel of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Father Joseph A. Janicki, he said, “In a recent conversation with Archbishop Weakland, I was left with the impression that it would not be advisable at this time to invite Father Murphy to return to Milwaukee to work among the deaf.” The letter was dated July 9, 1980. The source: the “Document Trail” that accompanied Goodstein’s article online.

April 27
In a New York Times op-ed, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig said the Church failed to protect children “for hundreds of years,” yet offered no evidence to support his claim. Most of the abuse, which involved post-pubescent males, occurred between the mid-60s and the mid-80s. Lessig falsely claimed that the problem is “worsening” because the Church is allegedly taking a leading role preventing victims from compensation: all the data show that in recent years the Church has done a better job addressing this problem than any other institution. Lessig also said that the Church is standing in the way of repealing sovereign immunity, when in fact it is the public school establishment—not the Church—that benefits from, and resists changes to, this discriminatory state doctrine. He even hailed New York Assemblywoman Margaret Markey, the one who sought to insulate the public schools from being treated the same way in law that private schools are with regards to the statute of limitations. In other words, Lessig sided with those who want to keep sovereign immunity.

April 27
The New York Times ran a story regarding a case of sexual abuse that broke in 1995. The story involved a case of alleged sexual abuse by Cardinal Hans Hermann Groër of Vienna. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who was not formally in charge of these cases at that time, nonetheless pressed for an investigation. At first, he was turned down, but soon thereafter Pope John Paul II approved an investigation.

Because that was most of what there was to this story, it just underscored our accusation that the point is to cast doubt on the pope’s commitment to ending abuse.

The article said that Cardinal Groër was suspected of “abusing minors and young men.” As has been true in most cases, the abuse did not involve pedophilia, but homosexuality. Also, the story mentioned how a Father Udo Fischer was molested by Groër “in the early 1970s.” Since Fischer was born in 1952, that meant the Timesunwittingly found yet another homosexual “victim.”

April 30
The New York Times ran an article by Rachel Donadio and demonstrated its tendency to allow editorial commentary to creep into its hard news stories. Donadio wondered whether the Vatican “will confront the failures in church leadership that allowed sexual abuse to go unpunished.” She added that “the culture of the church was for decades skewed against public disclosure and cooperation with the civil authorities,” and that only now are the bishops required to report abuse to the authorities. She consistently referred to the problem as pedophilia.

On April 10, the Times quoted Leslie Lothstein, a psychologist who has treated about 300 priests. He said that “only a small minority were true pedophiles.” The data show that most have been homosexuals.

Although most abusers went unpunished it was wrong to imply some sinister motive like “secrecy.” For example, the Murphy report on abuse in Dublin found that most bishops followed the advice of therapists—not canon law. Had Church law been followed things may have been different.

There is no law in most places mandating the reporting of any crime, and that is why fingering the Church smacked of bigotry.

May 6
The New York Times ran a front-page story on William Cardinal Levada, former archbishop of San Francisco and current head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that was just a rehash of old stories. The headline read, “Cardinal Has a Mixed Record on Abuse Cases.”

Front-page stories typically deal with current events, exceptions being new revelations about important historical events. But neither was the case with Levada. To learn that a leader has a “mixed record” extending back a quarter century is not exactly news. That’s why it read like an agenda.

The story behind this article was that when Levada was an archbishop, he learned that some homosexual priests molested post-pubescent males. Although the Times did not use the term homosexual, it was obvious from the story that the victims were not children. Then Levada did what nearly all leaders did at the time—and many still do—he sent the abuser to therapy. As usual, it didn’t work.

May 16
The New York Times ran an editorial that said, “The Catholic Church is working against the interests of child abuse victims in state legislatures around the country,” citing as proof its attempt to block laws in states that would amend the statute of limitations for alleged victims of sexual abuse. It urged New York lawmakers to pass a bill on this issue, noting opposition from the New York State Catholic Conference and Orthodox Jews.

What the Church was doing was protecting itself from campaigns to settle old scores by financially depleting the Church.

In 2009, there were two bills introduced in New York State on this issue: one applied only to private institutions; the other applied to both the private and the public sectors. The Times endorsed the former, thus showing its preference for (some) discriminatory legislation.

The Times’ editorial failed to note that in addition to Catholics and Orthodox Jews, those opposed to the New York bill included the New York State School Boards Association, the New York Council of School Superintendents, the New York Association of Counties, the New York Conference of Mayors, the New York Farm Bureau, the New York Medical Society and the New York Society of Professional Engineers.

May 17
The New York Times ran a front-page article on New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan trying to pin some dirt on him, but failed to do so.

Times reporter Serge F. Kovaleski had been investigating Archbishop Dolan for a year, but failed to lay a glove on him. But it wasn’t for lack of trying: unprofessionally, he allowed a professional victims’ group, SNAP, to drive his 3784-word story.

We contended that no other newspaper in the nation would post a front-page story on a religious leader that led nowhere. The paper reported that the professional victims were disappointed when they learned that Dolan, then the newly installed archbishop of Milwaukee, “had instructed lawyers to seek the dismissal of five lawsuits against the church.” The only question that mattered was whether Dolan made the right decision but the story never addressed this issue again.

Much coverage was given to a priest who sued his accuser. Interestingly, the accuser had a psychiatric history of lying and blaming others, and no one ever spoke badly about the priest. Largely unresolved, one wonders why this case was even mentioned, unless it was to put Dolan in a bad light for standing by the priest.

The story made a big deal about the fact that not all dioceses post the names of guilty priests, and that many do not list religious order priests. Why should the Church be held to a different standard than the public school administrators that don’t post the names of guilty teachers?

May 27
New York Times op-ed columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote a piece praising individual Catholics, but condemning the institutional Church as “patriarchal,” “premodern,” “out of touch” and “self-absorbed.” Discussing the situation regarding a nun who helped facilitate an abortion at a Catholic hospital and her subsequent excommunication, Kristof called the nun “saintly” and that she “helped save a woman’s life.”

June 29
On the Falls Church News-Press’ website, Wayne Besen wrote a scathing piece about the raid of Church offices in Belgium by the police; the name of the article was “Raiding the Child Rapists in Belgium.” Along with calling the Holy See “clueless on the gravity of the [sex abuse] situation” and “clumsy” in how it treats victims, Besen claimed that the Church has less credibility than the North American Man Boy Love Association. He also said that “no country that cares about its children should allow the Vatican authority to police itself” and to “follow Belgium’s laudable lead.”

July 10
The Boston Globe ran a cartoon by Dan Wasserman showing a bishop and a rabbi reading a newspaper headlined with a rabbi arrested for abuse. The bishop says to the rabbi to learn from the Church’s experience and “don’t ordain women.” This is another example of the media misrepresenting the Vatican statement on the ordination of women and sex abuse.

July 17
The New York Times ran an editorial titled “Tone-Deaf in Rome,” falsely stating that the Church equated the ordination of women to the sexual abuse of children. It said, “Red herrings about female priests only display the tone-deafness of the Vatican’s dominant male hierarchy.”

We stated that it is acceptable to take issue with any religion’s positions on public policy, but the house rules should always be respected (save for the few examples where innocent life may be threatened). We said that the Times was simply using a secular yardstick to measure the doctrinal prerogatives of the Catholic Church.

July 18
Cartoonist Tony Auth of the Philadelphia Inquirer depicted a bishop protecting himself with a Cross from a woman holding a sign that promoted the ordination of women.

July 18
The Austin Statesman ran a large colorful picture of a pregnant nun exiting an outhouse on the front page of its “Life & Arts” section. We wrote to the paper asking why they chose to do so. Kathy Blackwell, the paper’s executive features editor, stated that it kept in the theme of “A Summer As Weird As Austin.” We asked then for her to send us photos that they have published of a pregnant Muslim woman wearing a niqab exiting a public toilet. We received no response.

July 18
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times wrote a piece in boilerplate fashion on the Church’s stricture against female ordination. In her column she indicted the pope with covering up sex abuse cases as cardinal, but had no evidence to prove it. She also took issue with the Church’s investigation into the orders of American nuns. What she left out was the fact that the Vatican was responding to the complaints it received from serious nuns about the dissidents in their orders.

July 21
The Denver Post ran a cartoon that suggested the Church was more worried about the ordination of women than it is protecting children from abusers.

July 30
Eileen DiFranco, a member of Roman Catholic Womenpriests, wrote in thePhiladelphia Inquirer that the Vatican’s announcement of norms regarding the ordination of women “should be seen in the context of the church’s pervasive and persistent clerical misogyny throughout its history.” She falsely claimed that the Vatican placed female ordination on the same level as priestly sexual abuse, when in fact Church officials declared that they were grave offenses on different levels. DiFranco ended by stating that the “historical Roman Catholic misogyny spawn harmful consequences in the world. The women they relegate to second-class citizenship comprise two-thirds of the world’s poor and most of the world’s victims.”

August 4
Judge Sheila O’Brien, a Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court in Chicago, wrote an op-ed piece in the Chicago Tribune requesting that the Church excommunicate her. Judge O’Brien said that she loved Mass, Catholic social teaching, nuns who built churches, and dedicated priests for their many talents and good will. But she questioned “How can we stay in a church whose leaders protect pedophiles? Yet, how can we leave and relinquish our church to those very leaders?” She begged for excommunication because “it would free [her] conscience of all of this.” We said Judge O’Brien should recuse herself any time a priest or nun appears before her court because she clearly harbors an animus towards the clergy.

August 10
Martin Sutovec of the LaCrosse Tribune ran a cartoon entitled “White Collar Crime.” It depicts a drooling priest encroaching on a boy in underwear.

September 9
The Orlando Sentinel posted a picture on the front page of their website depicting a man, woman, and their dog—the man was dressed as Joseph, the woman as Mary, and the dog as Baby Jesus.

September 21
The Delaware County Daily Times wrote an article which called upon the Vatican to stop “demonizing” women. It read “Vatican officials should spend less time demonizing women and more time ensuring the prosecution of pedophiles. They are a danger to children of all faiths.”

September 25
Colin McNickle, an editor for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, wrote an article about the “financial scandal” the Vatican is facing and said “this new financial scandal—if proven—will beg the question of whether the Catholic Church is a corrupt criminal enterprise.”

October 10
Editors at the Washington Post decided not to run a cartoon that mentioned, but did not depict, Muhammad. The cartoon showed children playing in a park surrounded by zoo animals, roller-skaters, and hot-dog stands and sported a phrase at the bottom which asked, “Where’s Muhammad?”  The Posts’s style editor, Ned Martel, said their reason for not printing the “Non Sequitur” cartoon by Wiley Miller was that “it seemed a deliberate provocation without a clear message.” We include this entry because it highlights the incredible duplicity on the part of the newspaper: it had recently run an anti-Catholic cartoon.

October 15
The New York Times wrote “gushing” reviews about an art exhibit by ACT UP. The exhibit features a picture of the late John Cardinal O’Connor resembling a condom (pictured next to him), with the inscription, “Know Your Scumbag.”

November 5
The New York Times featured a review of a Danh Vo art exhibit. One element of the exhibit, which the Times featured in its article, was a picture of five priests—two of whom are holding hands. The picture itself was not objectionable, rather it was the intended implication found in the caption below the photograph which read: “A 19th-century photograph of Roman Catholic Priests in Danh Vo’s ‘Autoerotic Asphyxiation,’ at Artists Space.”

All we learned about the priests is that they were about to leave France for missionary work in Asia, one of whom was canonized as a saint in 1988. Bill Donohue asked, “How does this relate to autoerotic asphyxiation?”

November 25
A cartoon by Mike Luckovich appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It featured the pope and a condom with a caption that read “…and they make awesome water balloons…”

December 5
The New York Times ran a piece called “Immaculate Perception,” an article about the  “inevitable demise” of the Virgin Mary. It was a snarky piece suggesting that “Mary has undergone [shape-shifting] over the past two millennia methodically dismantled the legend, which had served as an instrument of oppression, stunting women’s growth and curtailing their lives.”

TELEVISION

January 3
Fox News analyst Brit Hume made a plea to Tiger Woods to turn to Christianity in order to seek forgiveness. For doing so, Hume caused a firestorm and was compared to Islamic extremists by Keith Olbermann of MSNBC.

January 13
Comedians Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong appeared on CBS News’ “Washington Unplugged” lobbying for the legalization of marijuana. During the discussion, Marin stated, “Statistically, people, kids have more to fear from priests than they do from marijuana.”

February 4
Sarah Silverman appeared on “The View”; during the show they played a portion of her obscene rant (the most vile comments were omitted) against Pope Benedict XVI that she made in October 2009 on Bill Maher’s show. Silverman got a pass when she first aired her foul-mouthed attack on the pope and had it repeated on “The View.” The most indefensible thing Silverman said on Maher’s show—that if the pope sold the Vatican, he “will get crazy p***y. All the p***y”—was left out.

Silverman was nothing if not defensive about her anti-Catholic remarks being made by a Jew. She said that this “has nothing to do with me being Jewish. You know, a lot of mail was like ‘What if it was Jewish?’ You know, yeah. If the Jews owned something like that I would be, I’d have no religion. I’m not talking as a Jew. I just can’t help that I’m a Jew—it comes out of my pores.”

Later that night, Silverman appeared on Joy Behar’s CNN Headline News show where the host questioned her about the rant. Instead of apologizing, Silverman reiterated what she said in the Maher video that if the pope sold the Vatican, “any involvement in the Holocaust” would be discounted. The fact that the pope’s “involvement” in the Holocaust was limited to his conscription into the Hitler Youth, along with every other young German boy at the time, and that he escaped at the first chance, was never mentioned by Silverman.

February 5
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar claimed that Catholics beat themselves when they commit a sin. She said, “[Catholics] beat themselves like this, mea culpa, mea culpa.”

February 9
On CNN Headline News’ “Joy Behar Show,” homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile said, “You have this pope saying that homosexuality is the end of civilization. That we have to protect the culture from homosexuality the way we have to protect the rainforest from degradation. You know, we’ve got a bishop in Guam who just said that gays are worse than the Islamic fundamentalists.” To which Behar said, “Oh, my God.”

None of what Signorile said was true. Not only had the pope never said that homosexuality is the “end of civilization,” a Lexis-Nexis search revealed that he has never even used that term.

Regarding the comment on homosexuality and the rainforest, here is exactly what the pope said in December 2008: “That which has come to be expressed and understood with the term ‘gender’ effectively results in man’s self-emancipation from Creation (nature) and from the Creator. Man wants to do everything by himself and to decide always and exclusively about anything that concerns him personally. But this is to live against truth, to live against the Spirit Creator. The tropical rainforests deserve our protection, yes, but man does not deserve it less as a Creature of the Spirit himself, in whom is inscribed a message that does not mean a contradiction of human freedom but its condition.” Nowhere is homosexuality mentioned, never mind the spin Signorile put on it.

In October 2009, Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron said that “Islamic fundamentalists clearly understand the damage that homosexual behavior inflicts on a culture. That is why they repress such behavior by death.” But he did not sanction such measures. Indeed, he unequivocally condemned them. “Terrorism as a way to oppose the degeneration of the culture is to be rejected completely since such violence is itself another form of degeneracy.” So Signorile twisted what was actually said. We called for a retraction but none was made.

February 17
On Ash Wednesday, Fox News analyst Bob Beckel criticized Vice President Joe Biden for wearing ashes on TV. In the middle of discussing President Obama’s stimulus plan, Beckel gratuitously said, “Sorry about laughing, but I looked at Joe Biden’s forehead and I know it’s Ash Wednesday, but I’m not sure I would wear that ash on the air.”

February 17
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar hosted several teenage mothers and asked them if they ever considered having an abortion during their pregnancy. When the teens said no, Behar asked, “Are you Catholic girls? Religious girls? That would be the reason I guess.” The teens also responded “no” to this question.

February 26
In a discussion on the “Joy Behar Show” regarding a church in a nudist colony, Behar said, “You know it’s a nice idea but where do they hang the rosary beads?”

March 4
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar discussed that being raised Catholic she had never seen a Bible: “I was raised Catholic, we had a missal. I never saw a Bible until I was in a hotel. It’s true.”

March 5
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and her guest, Margaret Carlson, discussed the health care bill and the reaction to it by nuns. Carlson claimed that Catholic bishops are too busy denying communion to pro-choice politicians. Behar replied, “The nuns would not be backing it if abortion was going to be funded.” Carlson added, “They’re the real conscience of the Catholic Church.” Behar agreed.

March 15
On ABC’s “The View,” the panelists criticized the decision of a Colorado Catholic school not to enroll students of a lesbian couple. Both Joy Behar and Elisabeth Hasselbeck claimed that Jesus would not have approved of the Catholic school’s decision. During her rant, Behar said, “We’ll be hearing from Bill Donohue tomorrow probably.” With the show’s record of Catholic-bashing, we had no choice but to comment.

March 31
On Comedy Central’s “South Park,” character Eric Cartman made three separate comments bashing the pope and implicating guilt in the case of Father Lawrence Murphy, the molester priest from Wisconsin. In answering a rhetorical question Cartman says: “Does the pope help pedophiles get away with their crimes? Is the pope Catholic and making the world safe for pedophiles? Does the pope crap on the broken lives and dreams of 200 deaf boys?” The episode re-aired on August 24.

April 2
Ovation TV aired the anti-Catholic production “The Last Temptation of Christ” on Good Friday. We wrote to CEO Charles Segars asking for an explanation why the station chose one of the holiest days on the Catholic calendar to air that particular production. We also asked if he had any plans to offend any other religions on their holy days. We did not receive a response.

April 3
On the “Wanda Sykes Show,” Sykes bashed the Catholic League for its ad defending Pope Benedict XVI in the New York Times. In her rant, she claimed that it would make sense for priests to be homosexual because they “get to hang out with other men. Wear a dress. Drink wine. They got candles and incense. Big old pretty jewelry.” She then said that the “only difference between the Catholic Church paying off its victims and Tiger Woods paying off his mistresses is the Catholic Church can write it off as tax-deductible.” She also said that the Church is “hiding [its] bad priests like Easter eggs.” The show re-aired on August 14.

April 5
On Easter Monday, the panel on ABC’s “The View” discussed the Church’s sex abuse scandal and the role that Pope Benedict XVI played in dealing with them; the panel was comprised of Barbara Walters, Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, Sherri Shepherd and Elisabeth Hasselbeck. During the discussion, Walters noted, “It’s brought up a lot of things that are unrelated and should not have been brought up. It brings up the whole case of homosexuality. There is not a connection between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. That is something that is talked about.”

During the discussion, Walters noted that Hasselbeck is Catholic, to which Hasselbeck quickly replied, “I was raised Catholic.” Goldberg then said, “I’m Catholic. I just don’t show it.” Hasselbeck later took a shot at the pope, essentially calling for him to be removed from his position: “What’s with the infallibility? At this point, in this economy, no one is immune from being fired. Someone who has been in charge of a system that is so faulty, so harmful, so hurtful, should not be in a position where you cannot take any blame. You should be in a responsible position.”

At the end of the discussion, Goldberg said, “You know, we often get accused of slamming the Church. We’re not slamming the Church. We’re slamming one practice of this horrifying priest that no one, no one saw fit to protect kids from.” Behar responded to this statement by saying, “Some of the bishops and people in Rome are slamming the New York Times for reporting it. It’s like let’s kill the messenger. That is really outrageous.”

We found it particularly offensive that they held this discussion the day after Easter.

April 5
During the monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno joked about the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal: “And Easter’s a little different this year at the Vatican, instead of hiding eggs, the Vatican just relocated them to a different lawn.”

April 6
During his monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno made a few jokes regarding the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal: “And yesterday was the big White House Easter Egg roll. Of course, Catholic priests, they didn’t have time to hide their eggs, they were too busy hiding each other…. As you know, the Roman Catholic Church continues to be rocked by the sex abuse crisis. In fact, they’re now thinking of changing their name to the Roman Polanski Catholic Church.”

April 14
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and author Paula Froelich were discussing the Vatican forgiving the Beatles for claiming to be bigger than Jesus. During the discussion, Froelich said, “Oh stop it’s marketing 101. Look over there shiny object; don’t look at me while I have my hands down some young boy’s pants.”

April 19
While discussing Pope Benedict XVI and the Church on the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar asked comedian Lewis Black, “Do you feel sorry for him at all? I mean he went from Hitler Youth to covering up for molesters, do you feel sorry for him?”

April 21
In his opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno was discussing the ash cloud that was enveloping Europe: “Give you an idea how bad the volcano was, it was spewing out so much ash the Catholic Church now said they couldn’t see what it was doing wrong.”

April 28
During the monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno was looking at different places through Google Street View, among the places was the Vatican: “All right, let’s go overseas again, let’s go somewhere in Europe. Go to Europe. Let’s do it. Oh, Vatican. Oh, there’s Vatican City. Can we go—show the front of it there. Look at—oh, kids stay free. Wow. Let’s get out of there.”

May 5
Comedy Central announced that an animated show, “J.C.” was being considered for its lineup. It was announced that the show was about Jesus Christ seeking to live out a normal life in New York, outside the reach of His “powerful but apathetic father.” What made this particularly offensive was that the same executives who were pitching “J.C.” were the same ones that censored a depiction of Muhammad on “South Park.” A network official, said about “J.C.”: “In general, comedy in its purest form always makes some people uncomfortable.” We noted this was completely untrue considering that Comedy Central has no interest in making Muslims feel uncomfortable.

We were happy to join a coalition of like-minded groups protesting this show. The group, headed by Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center, included: Michael Medved, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, Family Research Council and the Family Television Council.

May 10
During the opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno took another shot at the Church for the abuse scandal: “According to a New York Times poll, 54 percent of people feel that the Vatican is out of touch with Catholics. The other 46 are young Catholics who feel they’re way too much in touch. Way too much in touch.”

May 14
On NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno went back to the well and made a joke indicting all Catholic priests of being molesters: “I actually saw a Catholic priest today calling for a boycott…. Well, maybe he was just calling for a boy on a cot. I think that was it.”

June 1
During the “Hot Topics” segment of ABC’s “The View,” the panel discussed Queen Elizabeth asking for more money from English taxpayers. Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar took the opportunity to take gratuitous shots at the Church:

Behar: By the way, I think you read the piece Queen Elizabeth is asking for more money from the taxpayers in England because she can’t afford the up keep of all those castles. Sell one, sell one. She gets about 8.5 million I think, she wants 11 million.

Goldberg: Well I say the same thing about the Catholic Church. There’s a lot of folks saying we don’t have money, we’re closing schools. I’m sorry. You’ve got some dough. Let’s take a big look at stuff. You know you can’t say to the pope, “Listen you need to sell some of this stuff.”

Behar: He needs to sell some of his dresses.

Goldberg: You can’t wear it all at the same time. You got to sell one thing, one thing or two things….

June 10
While discussing Lady Gaga’s video “Alejandro” on ABC’s “The View,” Elisabeth Hasselbeck commented that the pop star might be “making a statement about how she feels that nuns are restricted in some way.” She continued, “I mean, the Catholic Church in some ways is the only thing that hasn’t reached the women’s lib movement, you know? Nothing’s been able to get in there.”

June 16
During an episode of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with John Stewart,” comedian Louis C.K. concluded his interview by noting that there were certain words he could not say on his FX show, “Louie.” After offering a few examples of the forbidden words, he said, “I was going to say that the pope f**** boys….” [The obscenity was bleeped out.]

June 28
On ABC’s “The View,” Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg commented on a Gestapo-like raid of Church offices performed by Belgian police. Behar said, “If you’re [the Church] not going to be forthcoming with the info, then the cops are going to come in and get it.” Goldberg feebly attempted to defend the Church—saying that it was making strides in dealing with sex abuse claims—but undercut her own argument by stating that the Church “can’t be surprised that they’re [the police] going to come in” if they were stonewalled.

July 7
In the opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno said, “Oh, and a Catholic priest in Connecticut has been charged with stealing $1.3 million in church money and using the money for male escorts. Of course, his parish is very upset about this—except the altar boys. They’re going, huh, dodged a bullet on that one. Yeah, he spent $1.3 million on male escorts and, of course, the other priests were very confused. They said: ‘Why buy the escort when the altar boys are free?’”

July 16
During his opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno took another shot at Catholic priests: “It was so hot I saw a priest stop at a kids’ lemonade stand—just got lemonade.” His shot at priests was the fifth and last in a string of jokes related to the hot weather, and it was the only one the audience shrugged off with “oohs.”

July 20
WBOC-TV in Delaware ran a poll on its website asking, “Do you agree with the Vatican’s position that ordaining women as priests is as grave an offense as pedophilia?” This question was flawed because the Church never equated the offenses.

August 16
Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” featured a segment with Stewart discussing the Ground Zero mosque controversy with show correspondant John Oliver. During the segment, Oliver brought up the Church’s sex abuse scandal in referencing locations for churches: “There’s a difference between what you can do and what you should do. For instance you can build a Catholic Church next to a playground. Should you? Should you do that Jon? Should you?”

August 16
On NBC’s “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon,” Fallon made a joke in his monologue regarding clergy sex abuse: “A priest in Italy has developed a new app that will let priests say mass on their ipads. Yeah. Yeah, altar boys are quickly learning the difference between itouch and bad touch.”

August 19
Comedy Central re-aired an episode of “South Park” that originally had aired in 2002. The show satirized the sex scandal by portraying priests eager to have sex with boys, and a bishop complaining in front of the pope that “we’ll never be able to have sex with boys again.” Catholics were revealed to really worship a “Queen Spider” and were lectured that the Church got out of hand because it deviated from the Scriptures, which are only ethical platitudes.

August 21
At a benefit for those effected by the Gulf Coast oil spill, Jay Leno delivered jokes about a “promiscuous priest in just the first 15 minutes of his hour-long show,” according to the Biloxi Sun Herald.

August 31
On the FX series, “Louie,” comedian Louis C.K.’s character was portrayed as a boy who was forced by a nun into feeling guilty about his sins. In the show, the Crucifixion was trivialized, a doctor traumatized children with an in-depth explanation of Christ’s Passion and Christianity was portrayed as a crock. At the end, Jesus was described by Louie’s mother as simply a “really, really nice guy who lived a long time ago and told everyone to love each other.”

September 7
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest Denis Leary were discussing the controversy surrounding the proposed building of a mosque near Ground Zero and a Florida pastor’s pledge to burn the Koran. When Leary stated that he was raised Catholic but that he is “lapse Catholic now,” Behar chimed in, “We all are.” Leary proceeded, “I hate organized religion.”

When discussing the mosque, Leary noted that the Archdiocese of New York tried to intervene to help facilitate a resolution in the controversy, but Behar stated that “they should really stay out.” Leary followed up by saying, “But when the Catholic Church is coming to help you decide on something, you know you’re in trouble. I don’t care what side of the argument you are on. Get the hell away. The Catholic Church is coming in and they’re actually trying to make sense out of it. You’re in trouble, you know.” Behar finished with, “I mean really, with their track record, the past few years, forget about it.”

September 15
In the monologue of the TBS show “Lopez Tonight,” host George Lopez discussed the pope’s car: “This car seats six adults comfortably and four boys very uncomfortably. It is the first time you hear a kid say, ‘I hope we’re not there yet.’”

September 21
On “Lopez Tonight,” host George Lopez made reference to a story about an investigation of the Vatican Bank, and then said, “Regarding the scandal, a Vatican spokesperson says as long as it doesn’t have to do with little boys, we confess.”

September 23
Matt Damon guest starred on the season premiere “30 Rock” as a romantic interest for Tina Fey’s character. In a scene where they are trying to get to know each other better they reveal a secret about themselves, Damon’s character’s secret was, “I was touched by a priest—it’s fine.”

September 25
CNN aired a documentary called “What the Pope Knew” that intended to lay blame on Pope Benedict XVI for the sex abuse scandal. The program alluded the pope was guilty of obstructing justice, and more concerned with stamping out dissent than stamping out sexual abuse. See page 44 for Bill Donohue’s response.

September 28
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest, Bill Maher, made sweeping comments about religion and Catholics. While Maher called faith a “suspension of critical thinking,” Behar claimed that religious people are “uninformed.” Among their assaults on the Church were claims that the Bible contained a lot of “wickedness” and was full of “just plain silliness.” Maher went further saying that the Ten Commandments were the “ultimate list of top ten things right from God” but they didn’t include “rape, incest, or genocide.”

October 4
On the “Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” atheist author Sam Harris said, “The Catholic Church is more concerned about preventing contraception than protecting child rape. It’s more concerned about preventing gay marriage than genocide.”

October 5
On the Fox program “Glee,” one of the characters saw an image of Jesus in his grilled cheese sandwich, calling it “Grilled Cheesus.” Throughout the episode religion, but Catholicism in particular, was referred to as a “fantasy” and that “God is kind of like Santa Claus for adults. Otherwise, God’s kind of a jerk, isn’t he?”

October 12
On Fox’s “Glee,” the character Rachel dressed in a provocative nun’s outfit while Finn dressed as a priest. Together, in costume, they sang a song to each other called “With You I’m Born Again.” One reviewer called it an “emotional episode about religion” while another noted the characters were “wearing super inappropriate costume [sets].”

October 12
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest Dan Savage made comments suggesting all priests are homosexuals. Savage, a homosexual, said “I thought about becoming a priest because I thought I would never be able to come out to my family.” Behar and Savage laughed when she said, “What, are you kidding? That would have been a perfect place for you.” Savage responded by saying, “Yes I wanted a big house and I wanted to wear dresses and have sex with men.”

October 14
On ABC’s, “The View,” Bill O’Reilly said that 70 percent of Americans are opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque. When he was pressed to explain he said, “Because Muslims killed us on 9/11.” Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg became upset and walked off stage. Barbara Walters apologized for her co-hosts’ behavior and responded to O’Reilly by saying it was wrong to demean a whole religion because of the acts of some individuals.

While we agreed with Walters we asked why it was okay for Behar and Goldberg to paint all priests as molesters, but they were “outraged” when an unqualified remark was made about Muslims?

October 19
On the MSNBC show “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell,” O’Donnell criticized some of the Republican candidates in the election season, citing them for making what he called “stupid comparisons” between being gay and being an alcoholic or obese. Guest Bill Maher agreed, but added a quip about homosexual priests, painting them all as molesters. Maher said, “We really can’t resist [talking about gays in the Catholic Church] if it’s all around us.” He continued, “You know, that’s how the Catholic Church talks about it. You know, ‘our priests are not sinning, they’re just giving into temptation when they’re molesting children and going gay and stuff like that.’”

October 27
On his MSNBC program, host Keith Olbermann went on a rant against Tea Party-backed candidates; one target was Ron Johnson, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Wisconsin. Earlier in the year Johnson had testified against a bill that would relax the statute of limitations on cases involving the sexual abuse of minors. Olbermann played with words and attacked the Church saying that Johnson “testified against toughening laws on pedophiles and employers who shield them. He argued this could damage a business. A business like the Catholic Church.”

November 1
“Saturday Night Live” ran a program special of re-run episodes entitled the “Women of SNL.” During the special, they re-aired a clip from 2008 where Tina Fey took a shot at nuns. Fey said:

“You know what? B****es get stuff done. That’s why Catholic schools use nuns as teachers and not priests. They’re mean old clams and sleep on cots and are allowed to hit you. At the end of the school year you hated those b****es, but you knew the capital of Vermont.”

November 1
Bill Maher appeared on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show where he discussed the remarks he had made about Muslims on his own HBO show in which he expressed concerns about the growing popularity of naming boys Muhammad in the U.K., noting the high birth rates of Muslims and how this does not bode well for the future. When Blitzer asked him to explain, he defended his statements fairly. When contrasted with the anti-Catholic comments he has being making for years  he looked like a hypocrite. It is obvious Maher is at home tolerating and contributing to anti-Catholicism.

November 7
The new HBO series “Boardwalk Empire,” took a shot at Catholics in a scene where a group of men were watching a silent film of a nun having sex. The shot of a nun on her hands and knees being penetrated from behind, and another that showed a man performing cunnilingus on her, was thrown into the show and had no relevance to the plot.

November 10
Jay Leno took a shot at the Church on an episode of the “Tonight Show” joking about a miscreant priest who ripped off his parish to pay for his online porn habit. Instead of going after this one priest, Leno attacked the entire Church, he said, “The Church transferred him to another parish that has free WiFi. Yeah, so that’s nice.”

November 22
On an episode of the Fox program “House,” a Latino man was vilified for his Catholic faith. The opening scene of the episode was of the man being nailed to a cross; he then began to spit up blood and was rushed to a hospital. When he got there, we learn that being nailed to a cross has become a ritual for him for every year so that his young daughter remains cancer-free; this was a “deal” he made with God. For the rest of the episode the man’s faith-healing method is condemned and portrayed as bizarre, barbaric, and silly.

The episode was relentless with its attacks on Catholicism, addressing issues such as embryonic stem cell research with sarcasm, calling faith delusional, and dubbing religion as something which is “communicable and it kills a lot of people.”

December 13
On an episode of “The View,” Denis Leary, discussed his new book which is a compilation of his Twitter posts. Joy Behar pulled one quote out as an example and read it to the audience. The quote was, “The pope is against gay marriage. This coming from a grown man who goes to work dressed like Lady Gaga.” After reciting the quote she laughed and called the book “good stuff.”

December 20
Comedy Central re-aired an episode of South Park titled “Bloody Mary.” The episode makes a mockery of Catholicism, suggesting that a statue of the Virgin Mary is bleeding and thus declared a miracle. Upon further investigation, the pope declares that a “chick” bleeding is “no miracle.” The original episode aired in 2005 and was pulled after complaints from the Catholic League.

December 22
Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Sherri Shepherd, bashed Catholics on an episode of “The View.” They went ballistic discussing the issue of the nun who authorized an abortion at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Arizona. The women failed to mention the fact that the parent organization of this hospital, Catholic Heathcare West, has a long history of flagrantly violating the teachings of the Church. No matter, the ladies took to trotting out miscreant priests, painted the Church as anti-women, and more.

December 23
A day after they went after the Church for the St. Joseph’s hospital situation, the women of “The View” went on an extended rant against Bill Donohue for his press release taking them to task. Elisabeth Hasselbeck went as far to tell Donohue to “Go to Hell.”

MUSIC

June 8
Lady Gaga released the video to her song “Alejandro” which featured her dressing as a nun, flashing a cross, swallowing a rosary and being raped by a group of S&M-type men. The pop star defended her video by calling it a “dedication of my love and appreciation for the gay community.”

August 22
Tacoma, WA
 – Lady Gaga, performed at a concert wearing a nun’s habit made of see-through plastic, exposing her underwear and only had x’s covering her breasts.

RADIO

June 2
During an interview on NPR, Samantha Bee of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” spoke about her Catholic upbringing and how mocking Catholicism is “joyful” and “pure pleasure” for her. During the interview, Bee discussed that she went to a “progressive Catholic school” that didn’t have “big gory Jesuses everywhere. They were monochromatic so you couldn’t see the blood dripping from the wounds of Jesus.” Bee also said that she had spoken with a lot of lapsed Catholics saying that they had a crush on Jesus, saying that He was “designed that way for young girls to find Him sexy and attractive.”

October 20
NPR fired Juan Williams after he made allegedly anti-Muslim comments. The Catholic League responded by pointing out that no one had ever been fired by NPR for their anti-Catholic fare. As early as 1997 NPR had been documented for various anti-Catholic remarks, among them is a song Tom Lehrer sang called, “The Vatican Rag,” some of the lyrics are as follows: “Try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer”; “Two, four, six, eight, time to Trans-substantiate.” This, however, didn’t merit Lehrer to be fired.

RESPONSE TO CNN DOCUMENTARY

The following is an excerpt from Bill Donohue’s response to a CNN documentary that aired September 25, 2010; the complete version is available online under “Special Reports.”

The program begins with music and graphics that set the tone: those who think Pope Benedict XVI has been adept at combating priestly sexual abuse must realize that there is “a darker, more complicated story.” Dark, yes, but from CNN’s perch, the story is not all that complicated: the pope is guilty of “foot-dragging and, perhaps, obstruction.”

CNN host Gary Tuchman says that “For decades, before he became pope, Joseph Ratzinger was a high-ranking Vatican official who, more than anyone else beside Pope John Paul, could have taken decisive action to stem the sexual abuse crisis.”

It is simply not true that Ratzinger was in charge of this issue “for decades.” In fact, he wasn’t given the authority to police the sexual abuse problem until 2001. What is truly astonishing is that Tuchman concedes as much later in the program. After he notes that “By 2001, the sexual abuse crisis was beginning to engulf the Catholic Church,” he says, “The pope gave Cardinal Ratzinger and the CDF (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) the power to cut through the bureaucracy and handle all sexual abuse cases directly.”

Nowhere in the program is there any evidence that the pope was guilty of obstruction of justice. This is a serious charge—the most serious made in the course of the documentary. Yet to throw this out, without ever producing evidence to substantiate it, is malicious. It won’t cut it to say that he was “perhaps” guilty of obstruction. CNN intentionally planted this seed and never explicitly addressed the subject of obstruction of justice again.

The program focuses on four miscreant priests. The first is Peter Hullermann. In 1986, he was convicted of sexually abusing boys while serving in  Germany. His case is central to the documentary because it questions the pope’s culpability.

After Hullermann was convicted, he was transferred to Munich for therapy. It should be noted that therapy was the preferred method for dealing with abusers at the time, both inside and outside the Catholic Church. Abusers were not seen, as they are today, as offenders deserving of punitive action; rather, they were seen as disturbed persons who could be rehabilitated via therapy. No matter, after his transfer, Hullermann was placed in a new parish.

The critical question is: Did Archbishop Ratzinger know that Hullermann was a convicted molester who was moved to another parish? We know he approved the transfer, but that’s about it. The Vatican maintains that it was Ratzinger’s deputy who placed Hullermann in the new parish. Importantly, CNN makes no claim to the contrary. Moreover, when the New York Times broke this story in March, the best it could do in establishing culpability was to say that Ratzinger’s office “was copied on a memo.” The Times also said that Church officials said the memo was routine and “unlikely to have landed on the archbishop’s desk.”

The case of Father Stephen Kiesle was included not to prove guilt on the part of the pope, but to add to the suspicion that he did not do enough.

CNN reports that Kiesle’s bishop, John Cummins, wanted him defrocked in 1981 after he was convicted of sexually abusing boys. Vatican officials, however, wanted more information; Cardinal Ratzinger had taken over as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a week after the Vatican office made its ruling. Following Church norms  that existed at the time, Ratzinger said he could not defrock Kiesle because no one under 40 could be laicized, and he was in his thirties. Kiesle could have been ordered to stand trial, but because he was so close to turning 40 (and a trial is not a speedy process), a decision was made to wait. On February 13, 1987, the day before Kiesle’s 40th birthday, he was defrocked.

What CNN did not report is that Kiesle was removed from ministry following his conviction. Nor did it mention the curious fact that in 1982, while still technically a priest, Kiesle married the mother of a girl he had abused in 1973. But to mention such an oddity may have shifted blame away from the pope, thus muddying the bottom line.

Father Lawrence Murphy, who allegedly molested some 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin in the 1950s, is covered in depth. But it didn’t go far enough. What was omitted is startling.

Tuchman reports that “Father Murphy’s case would come to the direct attention of Cardinal Ratzinger.” (My emphasis.) The viewer then waits in vain for evidence that Murphy’s case came to the direct attention of the pope. There isn’t any. We know that Terry Kohut, who was one of Murphy’s victims, wrote to Ratzinger’s office, but neither CNN nor the New York Times (which first reported on this story) has ever provided evidence that Ratzinger was personally involved in this case.

Jeffrey Anderson, who has made tens of millions suing the Catholic Church, and hates the Church with a passion, is asked point blank by Tuchman, “Do you think Cardinal Ratzinger knew about the case of Father Murphy?” Anderson parses his words in textbook lawyerly fashion. “Well, we know the letters went to his secretary, [Tarcisio] Bertone.” This is not in dispute. But was Ratzinger directly involved? Anderson adds, “thus, that Ratzinger was directly involved.” So because Bertone fielded the letters,thus Ratzinger was directly involved? That Tuchman never challenged Anderson is telling.

Here is what CNN did not tell the viewer. The crimes alleged against Murphy extend to the 1950s, yet the civil authorities were not formally asked to investigate until the mid-1970s; following a probe, the police dropped the case. Fast-forward to 1996, the first time the Vatican is notified. The Vatican decides to ignore the fact that the statute of limitations has expired and orders a trial. Melodramatically, CNN characterizes the internal inquiry a “secret church trial,” as if internal probes at CNN for employee wrongdoing are televised.

CNN, like the New York Times before it, never bothered to interview the one person who may have known about Ratzinger’s knowledge of the case, Father Thomas Brundage. He was the Judicial Vicar, the one who presided over the case between 1996-1998. When asked this year about Ratzinger’s role, he said, “At no time in the case, at meetings that I had at the Vatican, in Washington, D.C. and in Milwaukee, was Cardinal Ratzinger’s name ever mentioned.” Brundage added that he was “shocked” when the media tried to tie Ratzinger to the Murphy case.

In CNN’s eyes, if there was one hero in this case, it was the Archbishop of Milwaukee at the time, Rembert Weakland. It credits him writing to Ratzinger in 1996 asking how to proceed against Murphy, noting that Weakland acceded to the Vatican’s request to stop the trial, knowing the priest was dying; Murphy died two days later. But there is much the viewer does not learn.

Weakland was anything but a hero in dealing with sexual abuse. In 1984, he branded as “libelous” those who reported cases of priestly sexual abuse, and was rebuked by a judge for doing so. In 1994, he accused those who reported such cases as “squealing.” Moreover, he had to resign when his lover, a 53-year-old man, revealed that Weakland paid him $450,000 to settle a sexual assault lawsuit (Weakland fleeced church coffers to pay the bill).

With regard to the Murphy case, Weakland is again anything but a hero. Last spring, in a section called “Documents Trail” posted on the website of the New York Times(alongside an article by Times reporter Laurie Goodstein) there is a revealing letter from the Coadjutor Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin, Raphael M. Fliss, to the Vicar for Personnel of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Father Joseph A. Janicki. Bishop Fliss says, “In a recent conversation with Archbishop Weakland, I was left with the impression that it would not be advisable at this time to invite Father Murphy to work among the deaf.” The letter was dated July 9, 1980. So why did it take 16 years for Weakland to contact the Vatican about Murphy? CNN does not say.

The last case involves Father Alvin Campbell, an Illinois priest who pleaded guilty to sexual abuse of boys in 1985. Bishop Daniel Ryan visited Campbell in prison, asking him to leave the priesthood. After Campbell refused, Ryan asked Cardinal Ratzinger to defrock him. CNN reports that the request was refused because it did not come from Campbell.

This sounds strange, but there is more to the story. Bishop Ryan wanted Campbell defrocked quickly because he wanted to spare the victims a trial. This is understandable at one level, but there is still the matter of  civil liberties: the accused are entitled to their day in court. What CNN omitted from its coverage was that Bishop Ryan had the authority to remove Campbell from ministry, or go forward with the trial, recommending defrocking. He elected not to do so.

As CNN acknowledges, Ratzinger learned from the Campbell case and pressed Pope John Paul II to make serious changes in the way these cases were handled. “And from 2001 forward,” says Allen, “the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith became the beachhead for the Vatican for an aggressive response to the crisis.” True enough. And 2001 was the year that Pope John Paul II charged Cardinal Ratzinger with overseeing this issue. Because these changes occurred on Ratzinger’s watch, he made them happen.

After Father Thomas Reese makes some critical remarks, Tuchman concludes, “Cardinal Ratzinger was passionate about stamping out dissent. But there was never any public indication he was passionate about getting rid of pedophile priests.” This, along with the suggestion that the pope was guilty of obstruction of justice, marks the lowest point in the documentary.

If it wasn’t passion that provoked the pope to speak of the “filth” within the Church—he did so right before being elected—what was it? A cerebral exercise? And what was it that triggered him to reopen the case of Father Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, and then seek to reform the Legionaries? Was it boredom?

Tuchman opines that “Vatican experts say Ratzinger silenced, censored or otherwise punished dozens of theologians during his reign at CDF.” The charge is risible on the face of it: there is infinitely more tolerance for dissent in the Catholic Church than exists in the typical American college or university.

From top to bottom, what CNN did was the televised version of what the New York Times did in print form earlier in the year. The goal was to tarnish the image of Pope Benedict XVI, making him out to be a co-conspirator in the scandal. Though it came up empty handed with proof of his culpability, there was enough innuendo to convict Snow White.

The timeline of the scandal, it needs to be said, was from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s. Ironically, those within the Catholic Church who pushed for “progressive” reforms, e.g., making the case for more relaxed sexual strictures in the seminaries, and who then recommended therapy to treat molesters—most of whom were homosexuals—are the very ones today pointing fingers at the pope for the scandal. That’s the real scandal, though it is not likely to be covered by CNN.




The War on Christmas

November
We sent all 50 governors a manger scene to be displayed during the Christmas season, and most did not have the courtesy of even replying. As you can see from the list below, we received the best regional response from the South; the worst came from the West Coast. New York returned the crèche, though the letter we received was respectful: because of new ethics rules, it could not be accepted as a gift.
The strong response from the South is important: that was the area of the country which was once considered the most unfriendly to Catholics. The lack of response from the West Coast was predictable: for a very long time, Washington and Oregon have been the two most heavily agnostic/atheistic states in the nation. California, at least as far as the elites are concerned, has a secular reputation.
We are happy we did this: had we not done so, many states would not have displayed a nativity scene on public grounds. Moreover, because many decided to display them—and they did so without triggering a constitutional crisis—it just goes to show how utterly flatulent is the argument that the governors are restrained by law from doing so.
The following governors displayed the crèche donated by the Catholic League on public property this past Christmas season: Alabama: Gov. Bob Riley; Alaska: Gov. Sean Parnell; Arkansas: Gov. Mike Beebe; Idaho: Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter; Kansas: Gov. Mark Parkinson; Kentucky: Gov. Steve Beshear; Maine: Gov. John Baldacci; Mississippi: Gov. Haley Barbour; Montana: Gov. Brian Schweitzer; Nevada: Gov. Jim Gibbons; New Hampshire: Gov. John Lynch; North Carolina: Gov. Bev Perdue; Rhode Island: Gov. Donald Carcieri; South Dakota: Gov. Mark Sanford; Tennessee: Gov. Phil Bredeson; Texas: Gov. Rick Perry; Utah: Gov. Gary Herbert; and Virginia: Gov. Bob McDonnell.
December
New York, NY – The big battle this Christmas season was the showdown between the Catholic League and American Atheists. In early November we learned that the atheist group would be erecting a billboard at the New Jersey entrance of the Lincoln Tunnel that would read, “You Know It’s a Myth. This Season Celebrate Reason!” We effectively checkmated their  message on the Manhattan side with a billboard of our own funded by an anonymous donor that read, “You Know It’s Real. This Season Celebrate Jesus!” (See the competing billboards on page 68.) The media love conflict, so it was no surprise that our response generated big news.
What meant a lot to us was the enthusiastic response we received from Protestants: they wrote letters of thanks, sent checks, called to congratulate us, etc. we even heard from Jews who were happy with our riposte.
The militant response this Christmas season on the part of atheists was disturbing: they will stop at nothing in their crusade to eradicate Christmas.
On December 21, Bill Donohue appeared with American Atheists president David Silverman on the Fox News Channel to discuss a study which showed that those who do not celebrate Christmas often suffer emotional harm in the workplace. Donohue told Silverman “to get over it” and stop the whining.
Pope Benedict XVI has spoken eloquently about the twin evils of our time—radical secularism and religious fundamentalism. While religious extremists are a threat to our national security, radical secularists are a threat to our Judeo-Christian culture. Our billboard was designed as an appropriate cultural response to secular militancy.
December
The Christmas season was marked by relentless attacks on Catholics and Christians by atheists and non-believers. They campaigned to neuter Christmas with billboards, bus ads, banners and posters. Here is a list of the atheist campaigns from this Christmas season:
The American Humanist Association erected billboards stating, “Why believe in god? Just be good for goodness; sake” and “Want a better world? Prayer not required.” The group also ran a television commercial contrasting words from various religious texts such as the Bible with quotes from different humanists.
Every year in Loudon County, Virginia atheists and Christians compete for 10 spots on the front lawn of the county courthouse.  This year atheists ended up with 6 out of the 10 spots.  Where a Nativity scene once stood for 4 decades was replaced this year by a banner that read “Celebrating our Constitution: Keeping Church and State Separate since 1787.” A billboard was also erected saying, “Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens and enslaves minds.”
The group NY Atheists ran bus ads saying, “You Don’t Have To Believe In God To Be A Moral Or Ethical Person.”
The Seattle Atheists ran a billboard saying, “Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.—Thomas Jefferson”
The group also erected a “Tree of Knowledge” on the Capitol campus in Olympia. What looked like a Christmas Tree was decorated with pictures of Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin and other famous atheists. It had a sign next to it that reads: “At this winter Solstice, as people embrace light and hope, Seattle Atheists celebrates human knowledge: Inquiry and discovery, invention and exploration, the investigation of mysteries subatomic to astronomic ever growing, ever reaching, ever striving.”
Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers ran a bus ad that said, “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone.”
The Washington Coalition Of Reason placed ads on bus shelters with the message, “Don’t Believe in God? Join the Club.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation erected several billboards throughout the country. Among the messages were: “Imagine No Religion”; “I don’t believe in God because I don’t believe in Mother Goose”; and “Atheism is OK in Oklahoma. Saluting Gore—First Atheist Senator.”
FFRF also placed a Winter Solstice placard in the rotundas of the Wisconsin and Mississippi Capitols stating:
“At this season of the Winter Solstice,
may reason prevail.
There are no gods, no devils, no angels,
no heaven or hell.
There is only our natural world.
Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”
In Brookville, Indiana the FFRF attempted to remove a Nativity scene on court-owned property saying that it “steps over the line separating church, and state.”
The Triangle Freethought Society placed a billboard stating “Reason’s Greetings” in Raleigh, North Carolina.
The Florida Atheists and Secular Humanists ran an ad campaign on buses and billboards saying, “Being a good person doesn’t require God. Don’t believe in God? You’re not alone.”
Metroplex Atheists placed ads on buses in Fort Worth, Texas with the message “Millions of people are good without God.” Believers in the area responded with an ad campaign of their own with the message, “I still love you—God.”
The United Coalition of Reason and the Freedom From Religion Foundation teamed up to place ads on buses and billboards in the following cities: Detroit, Fayetteville, Philadelphia, Washington, Austin, Des Moines, Louisville, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Jacksonville, St. Augustine, St. Petersburg, Tampa, Tucson, Sacramento, St. Louis and Seattle. The ads read: “Millions of Americans are Good without God” and “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone.”
In Denver the Colorado Coalition of Reason erected three billboards responding to a nativity scene on government property. The signs said, “Stop government support of religion. MOVE this Denver Nativity scene to a church.”
Christmas Vandalism
 
During each Christmas season, we are loaded with stories on Christmas vandalism. Here is a list of incidents that came to our attention this year:
November
Chicago, IL – A van used by Kidz Korna—a charity that gives away thousands of presents to needy children at Christmas—was torched by vandals.
November 9
Mount Laurel, NJ – Vandals caused over $500 worth of damage to the crèche at Fellowship Baptist Church.
November 29
Columbia, MO – Two fraternity brothers from the University of Missouri stole Christmas decorations from homes near campus. Among the decorations were figures of the Baby Jesus and other nativity scene statuary, wreathes, Christmas trees, etc.
December 3
Hastings, MO – A 19-year-old man was arrested in connection with vandalizing homes and Christmas decorations covering the displays with swastikas, pentagrams and satanic messages.
December 6
Middleboro, MA  The town’s police chief said he had received more reports of theft and vandalism to Christmas decorations than ever before.
December 15
Birmingham, AL – Vandals burned the City of Birmingham’s Christmas tree from its downtown display.
December 19
Chicago, IL – A driver plowed through a residential Christmas display running over the Baby Jesus and decapitating figures from the nativity scene.
December19
Grenada County, MS – The stable used to house a live nativity for the Hardy Baptist Church was torn down by vandals.
December 24
Frankenmuth, MI – Vandals damaged a historic nativity scene at a Christmas store causing $40,000 worth of damage.
December 29
Fort Lauderdale, FL – Vandals toilet-papered Baby Jesus and a nativity scene at a private home around Christmas.
Figures of the Baby Jesus were stolen from homes, businesses or churches in the following locations: Red Lion, Pennsylvania; Taylorsville, North Carolina; Atlantic Beach, Florida; Lynchburg, Virginia; Redford Township, Michigan; Riverton, Utah; Elon, North Carolina; Easthampton, Massachusetts; Dublin, New Hampshire; Kirksville, Missouri; Fort Collins, Colorado; Middletown, Pennsylvania; Downers Grove, Illinois; Fayetteville, North Carolina; Waterloo, Missouri; Cookeville, Tennessee; Arkansas City, Arkansas; La Marque, Texas; Cranston, Rhode Island; Rochester, New York; Jacksonville, Florida; Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri; Lathrop, Missouri; Greeneville, Tennessee; Standish, Michigan; Yakima, Washington; Omaha, Nebraska; Alexander County, North Carolina; Pocatello, Idaho; Frankenmuth, Washington; Middleburg, Florida; Kansas City, Kansas; Phoenix, Arizona; Columbia, Missouri; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Saint Louis, Missouri; and Nikiski, Alaska.



Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous

January 5
Joliet, IL
 – A large painting depicting the history of Jesus Christ, displayed for the Christmas season, was stolen from a home.

January 10
Wilkes-Barre, PA
 – A student of Kings College was found urinating on the Wilkes-Barre’s city nativity scene.

January 13
Tuscaloosa, AL
 – A statue of Jesus was stolen from the Catholic Social Services grounds. The statue, which cost $400, was the centerpiece of an Eagle Scout project that intended to revitalize the grounds.

January 14
Moulton, TX
 – Vandals broke desks, glass and cabinets in the youth ministry center, the parish hall, classrooms and offices at St. Joseph’s Church.

January 21
Victoria, TX
 – Vandals broke into church offices and pried open the office safe, pulled a copper cross from the church foyer, broke windows, and smashed office equipment at Holy Family Church.

March 13
Salt Lake City, UT
 – A bronze statue of St. Ambrose, valued at $30,000, was ripped from its concrete pedestal and stolen from St. Ambrose Church.

April 16
Cumberland, RI
 – Six bronze and brass bells, valued at over $100,000, were stolen from the Dormition of the Virgin March Church.

April 24
Charlotte, NC
 – The head and praying hands of a statue of the Virgin Mary were knocked off by vandals at St. Matthew Church.

May 2
Tinley Park, IL
 – For the second time in a year, a statue of Jesus was vandalized in front of Our Lady of Perpetual Help religious store. The vandals decapitated the statue and stole the head.

May 14
Galveston, TX
 – A statue of Jesus was stolen from the office of Catholic Charities.

May 16
Weymouth, MA
 – A 66-year-old statue of the Virgin Mary was decapitated and smashed into pieces outside of Immaculate Conception Church. The statue was placed in the church’s grotto to honor 16 men who were killed in World War II.

May 24
Maywood, CA
 – Vandals ransacked St. Rose of Lima parish school by writing “666” on the walls and sticking a knife in the face of a painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The police said that the vandalism was consistent with a hate crime.

June 31
Boston, MA
 – A relic from the Cross that Christ was crucified on was stolen from the Holy Cross Cathedral. The holding case was pried open and the relic was stolen.

July 24
New Orleans, LA
 – St. John the Baptist Catholic Church suffered between $300,000 and $1 million  worth of damage after vandals threw rocks through three vintage stained-glass windows.

August 1
Cincinnati, OH
 – Over a six week period vandals  caused approximately $250,000 worth of damage to St. Joseph New Cemetery. The graves of several of the city’s first Roman Catholic bishops were damaged as well as more than thirty monuments.

August 3
Scranton, PA
 – A thief broke into the tabernacle of a Scranton church, stealing the Holy Eucharist.

August 14
Richmond, VA
 – Four silver chalices were stolen from St. Paul’s Catholic Church. The church estimated it would cost about $4,000 to replace them.

August 16
San Francisco, CA
 – The church bell from St. Michael’s Korean Catholic Church was stolen by an unidentified thief. The bell’s estimated worth was more than $400.

October 4
Boles Acres, NM
 – Three people were charged with vandalizing the Our Lady of the Desert Catholic Church.  Among the damages were broken windows, destroyed pews, graffiti, and torn priest’s clothing. The damages amounted to more than $10,000.

October 8
Madison, NJ
 – A surveillance video showed five men destroying light fixtures, shrubs, tearing down signs, and destroying a mailbox at St. Paul Inside the Walls, a Catholic center in New Jersey.

October 31
Omaha, NE
 – A statue of the Virgin Mary that resides outside of Christ the King Church in Omaha fell victim to vandalism; the statue’s hands have been broken off. The estimated damage was upwards of $10,000.

November
Andalusia, AL
 – Two men were arrested for stealing sacramental wine, cash, and other valuable items from Christ the King Catholic Church. The men were charged, one count each, with third-degree burglary, third-degree theft of property and second-degree receiving stolen property.

December 19
La Marque, TX
 – A statue of Jesus at the only Roman Catholic Church in La Marque was vandalized. The statue was found marked with drawings and had slogans such as “Who dis?” written on it with spray paint. Church officials estimate the damages will be about $10,000 to repair.

December 23
Isle La Motte, VT
 – Two blue spruce trees, from St. Anne’s shrine, were victims of vandalism and cut down two days before Christmas.




Papal

PAPAL WITCH-HUNT
In the spring of 2010, there was a concerted effort by the media, led by the New York Times, to blame Pope Benedict XVI for the sex abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church. What follows is a list of news releases that we issued on the role that the New York Times played in this papal witch-hunt:
March 15: NEW YORK TIMES GUNNING FOR THE POPE
On March 10, the New York Times ran an article on sex abuse in the Catholic Church stating that in Austria a priest abused a boy 40 years ago. On March 14, readers learned of a German case where a man says he was abused in 1979. But when Rabbi Baruch Lebovits was found guilty the week before on eight counts of sexually abusing a Brooklyn boy, the Times failed to report it. This was not an accident—it was deliberate.
Worse, on March 13, the Times ran a front-page story saying that in 2002, when the sex abuse scandal in Boston hit, the pope—then Cardinal Ratzinger—“made statements that minimized the problem.” No quotes or evidence of any kind were given. “Minimize the problem.” Interesting phrase. In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that “less than 1 percent of priests are guilty” of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). The Times characterized his remark by saying he “appeared to minimize the problem.” Looks like they got their talking points down just fine.
What the Times could have said was that on January 9, 2002, three days after theBoston Globe broke the story on sex abuse, it ran a story reporting that Ratzinger had sent a letter to the bishops worldwide saying that “even a hint” of the sexual abuse of minors merited an investigation. But to do so would have compromised the conclusion it sought to reach.
If the Times were truly interested in eradicating sex abuse, it not only would report on cases like Rabbi Lebovits, it would not seek to protect the public school establishment. But it does. Here’s the proof. In 2009, there were two bills being debated in Albany on the subject of sex abuse: one targeted only private institutions like the Church, giving the public schools a pass; the other covered both private and public. The Timesendorsed the former.
 
March 16: NEW YORK TIMES TARGETS THE POPE AGAIN
 
Once upon a time there was a homosexual priest who was accused of molesting boys in Germany. That was 30 years ago. At the approval of Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger (now the pope), he was sent away for therapy and was later reinstated; years later, under a new archbishop, there was another incident and more therapy.
We know this because the New York Times (which does not like to report on molesting rabbis in 2010), told us about this on Saturday, March 13 in a front-page article. On March 16, it ran a front-page article on the same story. Was there any difference? Yes. In the article from the 13th, the Times was only able to identify the priest as bearing the initial “H.” On the 16th, it had real news: his name is Hullermann. And now “H” has been suspended.
Was it wrong to send abusers to therapy? Is it wrong today? The Times did not say. While it is painfully obvious that psychologists and psychiatrists have oversold their competency in treating abusers, it has long been considered to be both scientifically and ethically sound. It still is. Perhaps that view is unwarranted, but it is flatly unfair to cherry-pick Catholic decision-makers for indictment when therapy fails.
The Times also wrote on the 16th that when the pope was Cardinal Ratzinger under Pope John Paul II, he was “in charge of reviewing sexual abuse cases for the Vatican.” In doing so, the Times left the impression that Ratzinger was in charge of overseeing these cases when the scandal developed. Nonsense. The Times reported on January 9, 2002 that he had just been appointed to this role. Thus, he had nothing to do with this issue at the time when most of the abuse took place (mid-60s to mid-80s).
The Times has a vested ideological interest in keeping this story alive. To say it dislikes Pope Benedict XVI intensely is an understatement.
March 19: NEW YORK TIMES GIVES THE 
WRONG IMPRESSION
 
We commented on a front-page article in the March 19 New York Times on a sex abuse incident that took place in Germany 30 years ago:
“For decades it was common practice in the church not to involve law enforcement in sexual abuse cases.” Thus did the Times give the impression that outside the Catholic Church, secular and religious organizations typically called the cops when they learned of abuse cases by employees. This is pure, unadulterated bunk. The rule, not the exception, was to deal with such matters internally.
Only recently have there been any laws mandating that the authorities be notified. What really takes chutzpah is the fact that the New York Times did not endorse a bill last year in New York State which would have treated public institutions the same way it would have treated private institutions in dealing with sex abuse.
In the 1960s, 70s and 80s—the very period when the vast majority of cases of priestly sexual molestation took place—the prevailing zeitgeist was to rehabilitate and renew. Had the Church dealt punitively right off the bat with alleged offenders, it would have been branded heartless and un-Christian at the time. How perverse it is, then, that those who sold us the idea that every malady could be cured by rehabilitation are now the very ones condemning the Catholic Church for following their prescription. That they are selectively doing so is all the more infuriating.
Anyone who thinks this twisted thinking is confined to the New York Times isn’t keeping up with liberal sentiment on this issue. It’s the norm.
 
March 25: NEW YORK TIMES AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
 
We commented on the front-page article in the Thursday, March 25 New York Timesabout priestly sexual abuse:
Media requests to deal with this subject made it difficult to provide an adequate response to that day’s article by Laurie Goodstein. But the time had come to ask some serious questions about why the Times was working overtime with wholly discredited lawyers to uncover dirt in the Church that occurred a half-century ago. Those questions were raised in an ad we wrote that was published in the March 30 New York Times. This was the last straw.
 
March 26: NEW YORK TIMES TRIES TO KEEP FLAME ALIVE
 
“Pope Was Told Pedophile Priest Would Get Transfer.” That was the headline in the March 26 New York Times piece on the pope. Yet the Times offered absolutely no evidence to support this charge. All it said was that his office “was copied on a memo” about the transfer of Peter Hullermann. According to Church officials, the story said the memo was routine and was “unlikely to have landed on the archbishop’s desk.”
Let’s say Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger, now the pope, did in fact learn of the transfer. So what? Wasn’t that what he expected to happen? After all, we know from a March 16Times story that when Ratzinger’s subordinates recommended therapy for Hullermann, he approved it. That was the drill of the day: after being treated, the patient (we prefer the term offender) returns to work. It’s still the drill of the day in many secular quarters today, particularly in the public schools. A more hard-line approach, obviously, makes more sense, but the therapeutic industry is very powerful.
In other words, there is no real news in that day’s news story. So why print it? To keep the flame alive. We alerted our members to look for the Times to run another story saying they had proof Ratzinger knew of the transfer. Did they think that after he approved the therapy that Hullermann would be sent to the Gulag?
We noted that the March 25 Times story on the half-century old case concerning Father Lawrence Murphy would be the subject of an upcoming op-ed page ad. Meanwhile, we took advantage of every TV and radio opportunity to set the record straight. The pope is a great man, and the Catholic League is proud to stand by him.
 
March 29: NYT UNFAIRLY CITES POPE’S ROLE
 
We criticized an op-ed article and a news story in the New York Times about Pope Benedict XVI’s role in the case of Father Lawrence Murphy:
In the March 28 Times, columnist Maureen Dowd said that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now the pope, “ignored repeated warnings and looked away in the case of the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy, a Wisconsin priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys.” Wrong. Her own newspaper said it has no evidence that he even knew of letters that reached his office in 1996 about this matter.
The March 29 edition of the Times had a news story which said that Ratzinger “did not defrock a priest who molested scores of deaf boys in the United States, despite warnings by American bishops about the danger of failure to act, according to church files.” Wrong. Besides the fact that there is no evidence he even knew of the case, his office actually lifted the statute of limitations—the abuse took place in the 50s and 60s—and began an investigation. Murphy died while the inquiry was proceeding.
It was one thing for pundits to play fast and loose and ignore the evidence. It was doubly distressing when those who write for the New York Times did so. While this may come as a shocker to the Times, no priest can be defrocked until he is found guilty. If the inquiry was on-going when Murphy died, there is no way he could have been defrocked.
This is particularly disgusting given that the Times is ever so sensitive about the civil liberties rights of accused jihadists.
 
March 31: POPE’S CRITICS LACK EVIDENCE
 
Much of the accusation against Pope Benedict XVI in the case of Wisconsin priest Father Lawrence Murphy rested on his alleged disinterest in pushing for Murphy to be defrocked. Contradicting this smear was the judge in the Murphy trial and the New York Times itself.
Father Thomas Brundage was the judicial vicar for the Milwaukee Archdiocese who presided over the trial of Father Murphy from 1996-1998. Never once did the Times contact him, but had they done so they would have learned the following. “At no time in the case, at meetings that I had at the Vatican, in Washington, D.C. and in Milwaukee,” said Brundage, “was Cardinal Ratzinger’s name ever mentioned.” He added that he was “shocked” when the media tried to connect Ratzinger’s name to the case. Murphy died, by the way, when he was still a defendant in a church criminal trial.
Even the New York Times had acknowledged that there is no evidence that in 1996 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the pope) was even aware of proceedings against Murphy. Moreover, the investigation did not even have to be launched given that the statute of limitations had expired.
We knew what was going on. There were those who are wholly unimpressed by the evidence—they just wanted to get the pope. No doubt there was wrongdoing done in the Murphy case, but it was morally outrageous to lay it at the foot of the pope. Indeed, the pope’s critics looked rather enfeebled given what Father Brundage and the Times said about his complicity.
We challenge anyone to produce a single piece of evidence that the pope did anything wrong.
 
April 6: HOW TO SOLVE THE ABUSE PROBLEM
 
We explained to the press how the Catholic Church could resolve the sex abuse scandal.
We said the best thing the Catholic Church could possibly do would be to mimic the success of the public schools, especially in New York City. For example, the New York Times ran a story on April 6 about an accused priest from India who was stationed temporarily in Minnesota a few years back He would never have seen the light of day had he been assigned to a “rubber room.”
The New York Post had recently described the “rubber rooms” as places where educators accused of wrongdoing sit for months, or even years, at full pay while their case is being investigated. What do they do? They are known for “snoozing at their desks, holding jam sessions, playing board games, and breaking into fights.” Moreover, “Doodling is a popular pastime. Others read every word of a newspaper. Many gulp down cup after cup of coffee.” There are currently 675 teachers in the “rubber rooms,” costing the City over $40 million a year in salaries alone. Some of the accused have been drawing full pay for 12 years. (Soon after we issued our release, the City decided to shut down the “rubber rooms” but still the teachers were paid to perform “clerical” duties.)
The good news was that the Times doesn’t care about the “rubber rooms,” which explained why it seldom wrote about them. Best of all, the Times never once editorialized against them. Indeed, it didn’t even like to report on efforts to insure greater rights for the molesters. For example, when New York Assemblyman Peter Abbate, Jr. introduced a bill to terminate in-house disciplinary inquiries for all civil servants, thus making it easier for abusers to skate. But it never made the Times.
The lesson to be learned was quite simple. The Catholic Church should never remove accused priests from ministry—they should assign them to a “rubber room” where they can do something productive, e.g., finger painting, with no cut in pay. Following the lead of the teachers’ unions, the Church should work against all reform efforts. And when it is criticized for cheering laws making it easier for the accused to get away scot-free, it should just say it is modeling itself on the exemplary work of the teachers’ unions. The Times should understand. Shouldn’t it?
 
April 7: MAUREEN DOWD’S WHINY MOMENT
 
Maureen Dowd had an article in the New York Times titled, “The Church’s Judas Moment.” We couldn’t resist issuing a rejoinder.
It is next to impossible for Maureen Dowd to write a piece about the Catholic Church without sounding whiny. Always the victim, Maureen is forever put upon by the boys in robes. That she desperately wants to try one on for size is obvious, but, alas, this is a problem without a remedy. Well, not quite: there are still a few mainline Protestant churches open that might welcome her.
Maureen confessed that she was so flustered by the Vatican, New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan and Bill Donohue that she could not write her column, and that is why she invited her “devout Catholic” brother Kevin to pen one in her place. That was a mistake.
Dowd’s brother wrote that since Vatican II, laypeople have been “performing the sacraments.” He later wrote that “Married people and laypeople giving the sacraments are not going to destroy the church.” Someone needed to inform him that laypeople are not permitted to give the sacraments.
Devout Kevin also seemed confused about another matter, although this time he was not alone. He cheered the “liberalized rules of the Vatican,” but noted with sadness that celibacy was not dropped. As a result, he said, the Church ended up “drawing on men confused about their sexuality who put our children in harm’s way.” But homosexuals are no more confused about their sexuality than heterosexuals. He did deserve credit, however, for noting that too many of the wrong guys got into the Church following Vatican II.
We wished Maureen a speedy recovery and hoped the R&R would have an alembic effect. And we hoped Devout Kevin accessed a copy of Catholicism for Dummies.
April 20: NEW YORK TIMES MARKS POPE’S ANNIVERSARY
We commented on the way the New York Times marked the 5th anniversary of Pope Benedict XVI:
The news story was remarkable, even for the Times. Readers learned that the sexual abuse scandal is “growing” and is “quickly defining his papacy.” Furthermore, the pope has “alienated Muslims, Jews, Anglicans and even many Roman Catholics.”
In point of fact, the scandal ended about a quarter century ago: the timeline when most of the abuse took place was the mid-60s to the mid-80s. The only thing “growing” is coverage of abuse cases extending back a half-century, something the Times has contributed to mightily. To say his papacy is being defined by old cases may be the narrative that suits the Times, but it most certainly is not shared by fair-minded observers.
Yes, many Muslims were alienated by the pope’s brutal honesty in calling out Islam for its subordination of reason, and indeed many proved his point by resorting to violence. The heroics of Pope Pius XII in saving as many as 860,000 Jews during the Holocaust is a stunning record, especially as compared to the editorial silence that the Timesexhibited in addressing the Shoah at the time. It is not correct, as the Times said, that the pope attempted “to rehabilitate a Holocaust-denying bishop,” rather he attempted to reconcile a break-away Catholic group which unfortunately had as one of its members a Holocaust-denying bishop. Anglicans unhappy with the pope’s outreach to the disaffected in their ranks represent an embarrassing chapter for them, not Catholics. And it is hardly surprising that those Catholics who intensely disliked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger are, for the most part, the same ones who reject Pope Benedict XVI.
The pope can be justly criticized for missteps in governance and communications, but to paint him as a divider is a cruel caricature being promoted to hurt him, in particular, and the Church, in general.
The following is a list of news releases that we issued related to the papal witch-hunt that was started by the New York Times:
March 18: ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER SLANDERS PRIESTS
On the blog site of the March 17 Orange County Register was a series of questions and answers on the subject of sexual abuse. At the top, under the headline question, “Think you can spot the sex offender in the crowd?”, was a silhouette of a priest: faceless, the silhouette was clearly a male wearing a priest’s collar and black jacket. None of the questions or answers mentioned anything about a priest, or about religion in general. This entry was still posted a day later on the blog of the Santa Ana, California newspaper.
We called the newspaper a disgrace. By slandering tens of thousands of Catholic priests all across the nation, the Orange County Register carved out a special place for itself in the annals of journalism.
When the Danish cartoon controversy exploded in 2006, the Register refused to offend Muslims by printing the depictions of Muhammad. Ken Brusic, the editor, explained the decision by saying that to publish the cartoons the newspaper “would needlessly offend many in our community and would add little to the debate.” But offending Catholics, especially Catholic priests, is perfectly legitimate.
We said that nothing short of an immediate apology will suffice, and it should come from the top, Terry Horne, president and publisher.
March 19: ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER GETS THE MESSAGE
On March 18, the Catholic League protested the blog site of the Orange County Register which showed the silhouette of a priest in a Q & A section on sexual abuse. The following day we received an apology.
Thanks to our members who pounded the newspaper with e-mails, the president and publisher of the Register, Terry Horne, released a letter of apology to complainants. “Singling out one group, especially in such a recognizable way, was unfair and inappropriate.” He ended his letter by saying, “We hope you will forgive the lapse in judgment. And I hope you will accept my personal apology.”
On the blog site, the newspaper posted the Catholic League’s news release from the previous day. The logo of the Catholic League was placed at the top. We accepted the apology. Case closed.
March 23: PUSH FOR CELIBACY IMPLIES GAY GUILT
Reports in Ireland and Germany of decades-old cases of priestly sexual abuse triggered an array of articles, surveys and talk-show discussions on the need for the Church to end the celibacy requirement. The implication was that more heterosexuals, and less homosexuals, would be drawn to the priesthood, thus alleviating the problem.
The reasoning is sound: as we have seen from several studies—including the one just released by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops—80 percent of the victims are male. Just as important, the majority of the victims are post-pubescent. In other words, we are talking about homosexuality, not pedophilia.
Those who fancy themselves progressive would never, of course, say there is a homosexual link to priestly sexual abuse. But they know it to be true in their heart of hearts. For example, no one seriously believes that pedophiles would be inclined to marry if celibacy were lifted—they are not interested in adults. But surely homosexuals would find the seminaries and parishes less attractive if most of the men were married.
So as not to be misunderstood, it is nonsense to say that homosexuality causes sexual abuse. Moreover, it is both untrue, and unfair, to say that most gay priests are molesters. They are not. But it is also true that most of the molesters are gay. Is this not the unstated predicate of progressives pushing for an end to celibacy? Why else recommend doing away with it?
In short, the only difference between most progressives and most conservatives on this issue is that the latter are not afraid to identify the elephant in the room.
March 24: MEDIA MOSTLY IGNORE SEX ABUSE DATA
Bill Donohue commented on the way the media reacted to the 2009 annual report on priestly sexual abuse that was released by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:
There was a 36 percent decline in allegations of clergy sexual abuse between 2008 and 2009. As usual, most of the alleged offenders are either dead and buried, have already been thrown out of the priesthood, or are missing. There were six allegations made in 2009 involving minors. Six. As always, males are the preferred target. The report gave an age breakdown but did not mention the significant role played by homosexuals. Media reports never mentioned it either.
Here’s how the media responded. AP ran a story of 864 words, but most newspapers ignored it: only two—the Asbury Park Press and the News Journal (Wilmington, Delaware)—decided to run it. The Washington Post did a responsible job by covering it in 505 words. The St. Paul Pioneer Press also offered a decent summary. By contrast, the New York Times ran a 92-word article. The Chicago Tribune did much the same. None of the other big dailies—from the Catholic-bashing Boston Globe to the reliably anti-Catholic Los Angeles Times—even bothered to mention it. NPR gave it short mention, but the broadcast and cable stations ignored it.
It was all so predictable. Bad news about the Church is front-page news, but good news goes largely ignored. To those who say it’s no different with any other group, consider this. AP reported on March 24 that a rabbi accused of raping a 7-year-old girl in New York a decade ago was arrested the day before outside his Arizona synagogue. Aside from a very brief article in the New York Daily News, not a single newspaper in New York or Arizona—or anywhere else—bothered to print it.
March 30: MSNBC LIBELS THE POPE
On March 30, we issued a release instructing people to go to the home page of MSNBC and click on “World News.” From there we said to click on “Americas.” Next click on the article, “Losing Their Religion? Catholicism in Turmoil.” Scroll down and in the “Click for Related Content” section there was an article entitled, “Pope Describes Touching Boys: I Went Too Far.” Clicking on this piece took the reader to an article about a homosexual German priest who had sex with males in the 1980s. It said absolutely nothing about the pope. Yet MSNBC painted Pope Benedict XVI as a child molester in the tease to the article.
We said a retraction, and a sincere apology, were in order. We also said they should also investigate how this happened and who was responsible.
March 30: NBC APOLOGIZES FOR MSNBC’S HIT ON POPE
NBC apologized for the article on MSNBC’s website entitled, “Pope Describes Touching Boys: I Went Too Far.” The article had nothing to do with the pope.
NBC said the attributed quote was erroneous and they corrected the error. An apology was also extended. The apology was accepted. We hoped that whoever was responsible for this outrageous post was questioned about it and that appropriate measures were taken.
March 30: HYSTERIA MARKS POPE’S CRITICS
Seldom had we seen such delirium over an innocent man, namely Pope Benedict XVI. Christopher Hitchens wanted to know why the European Union was allowing the pope to travel freely. Perhaps he wanted the pope handcuffed at the Vatican and brought to the guillotine. Margery Eagan of the Boston Herald, another big fan of the Catholic Church, said, “The Pope should resign.” One looked in vain for a single sentence in her article that implicates his guilt in anything. Then we had the Washington Post indicting priests by painting all of them as child abusers in a cartoon. There were many other examples of this kind of hysteria.
As indicated in our New York Times op-ed page ad that day, the pope is innocent. Indeed, he is being framed. No one had any evidence that he even knew of the case of Father Lawrence Murphy. Indeed, his office didn’t find out until 1996 and then it did the right thing by summoning an investigation (it could have simply dropped an inquiry given that the statute of limitations had run out). No matter, the pope’s harshest critics blamed him for not defrocking a man whom he may never have heard of, and in any event was entitled to a presumption of innocence. Or was he? There are not just a few who would deny civil liberties protections to priests.
It is a sad day when al-Qaeda suspects are afforded more rights than priests. That this kind of intellectual thuggery should emanate from those who fancy themselves tolerant and fair-minded makes the sham all the more despicable.
April 1: VATICAN GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE
Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, directly took on the New York Times for its coverage of the Father Murphy abuse case in Wisconsin. Commenting on the news story by Laurie Goodstein, Levada wrote, “The point of Goodstein’s article, however, is to attribute the failure to accomplish this dismissal [of Father Murphy] to Pope Benedict, instead of to diocesan decisions at the time.”
Cardinal Levada had it just right. The wrongdoing in this case rests in Wisconsin. Why did the victims’ families wait as long as 15 years to report the abuse? Why were the civil authorities unconvinced by what they uncovered? Why did Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland wait almost two decades before he contacted the Vatican?
Weakland’s record in handling sex abuse cases is a matter of record. In 1984, he branded as “libelous” those who reported cases of priestly sexual abuse (he was rebuked by the courts for doing so). Ten years later he accused those who reported such cases of “squealing.” And, of course, he had to resign when his lover, a 53 year-old man, revealed that Weakland paid him $450,000 to settle a sexual assault lawsuit (Weakland took the money from archdiocesan funds). It’s a sure bet that if Weakland were a theological conservative—and not a champion of liberal causes—the media (including the National Catholic Reporter and Commonweal) would have been all over him.
We also needed to learn from Goodstein why she waited until Wednesday, March 30, to interview Father Thomas Brundage, the priest who presided over the Murphy trial. Brundage has said that the pope, then Cardinal Ratzinger, had absolutely nothing to do with the Murphy case. And we need to know why Weakland never gave Brundage a letter he wrote asking him to call off the trial.
There’s dirt in the Murphy case, but it sits in the U.S.A.—not Rome.
April 1: ATTEMPTS TO CENSOR DONOHUE FAIL
Bill Donohue commented on the attempts to censor him:
“Producers have been telling me for years that my critics have implored them never to invite me back on any program. But they always do. While the media are overwhelmingly liberal, they have an obligation to offer different points of view. Hence, their non-stop invitations asking me to speak.”
The attempt to silence Donohue came from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Call to Action and the Interfaith Alliance. The three organizations joined hands and demanded that the media “ignore Bill Donohue.” Their complaint? Donohue’s telling the truth about the role homosexual priests have played in the abuse scandal.
The data collected by John Jay College of Criminal Justice show that between 1950 and 2002, 81 percent of the victims were male and 75 percent of them were post-pubescent. In other words, three out of every four victims have been abused by homosexuals. Puberty, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, begins at age 10 for boys.
No problem can be remedied without an accurate diagnosis. And any accurate diagnosis that does not finger the role that homosexuals have played in molesting minors is intellectually dishonest. We called for the cover-up to end, as well as the attempts to muzzle Donohue’s voice. Everything he said is what most people already knew, but were afraid to say. It was time for some straight talk.
April 6: ASSOCIATED PRESS GETS A TIP
AP reported that in the course of a TV interview on Sunday, April 4, the archbishop of Santiago, Chile said he was investigating “a few” cases of priestly sexual abuse. We decided to give AP a tip by bringing similar stories to its attention, all of which were reported in the previous week in the U.S. (since March 31), but none of which it chose to cover:
• A Milford, Connecticut teacher’s aide pleaded no contest to sexually assaulting a high school student.
• A Brookville High School teacher in Pennsylvania was charged with aggravated indecent assault; indecent exposure; corruption of minors; possession of obscene material; sexual abuse of children; and unlawful conduct with minors.
• A middle school gym teacher in Athens, New York was arrested on charges of sex abuse and forcible touching.
• A Morrisville-Eaton Central School District teacher outside Utica, New York was arrested for forcibly touching a girl over a three year period, beginning at the age of 11, and for endangering her welfare.
• A former Teacher of the Year in Bullitt County, Kentucky was indicted by a grand jury on sexual abuse charges.
• A teacher at Olin High School in Iowa was charged with sexually exploiting a freshman. This same teacher faced similar charges two years ago when he taught in another school, and was simply moved from one school district to another.
Every day there are religious and secular leaders, all over the world, who learn of accusations of sexual misconduct, but none are given global coverage by AP unless it involves someone like the archbishop of Santiago. That AP thought his admission was newsworthy, but did not deem it worthy to cover the above half-dozen examples, was revealing. Now it may be a lot sexier to get the Church, but serious journalism ought to be guided by more professional standards of inquiry.
April 9: ABUSE SCANDAL IS NOT WIDENING
Every news story and commentary that stated the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church is widening was factually wrong. The evidence showed just the opposite—it has been contracting for approximately a quarter century. Here’s the proof: the John Jay College of Criminal Justice—not exactly an arm of the Catholic Church—has shown repeatedly that the vast majority of the abuse cases took place from the mid-60s to the mid-80s. And the reports over the last five years show a rapid decline. The latest report, covering 2008-2009, shows exactly six credible allegations made against over 40,000 priests and tens of thousands of others working for the Catholic Church.
Almost all of the chatter about the alleged widening of the scandal was a direct result of media sensationalism. A perfect example could be found in an April 9 Reuters story. The headline read, “Norway’s Catholic Church Reveals New Abuse Cases.” But what was new was not a new wave of incidents, rather it was an admission by the Norwegian Catholic Church of four cases of alleged abuse that it had not previously disclosed. Two of the cases dated back to the 1950s; another dated back two decades; and the fourth one was based on “rumors.”
The same Reuters story opened by saying these four stories come “two days after it [the Norwegian Catholic Church] revealed that a bishop who resigned last year did so after abusing an altar boy.” That made it sound like a Church cover-up. Only at the end of the story did the reader learn that the reason why this story had not emerged until then was precisely because the victim initially asked that it not be made public.
There is no other religious or secular institution that was cherry-picked by lawyers and the media like that of the Catholic Church. If what happened in the 1950s qualifies asnews when it happened in the Catholic Church, then surely it would be news to learn of all those who were abused a half-century ago by ministers, rabbis, school teachers and others. But it will never happen—such news fails to make the media salivate.
April 12: MEDIA COVER-UP OF SEX ABUSE WIDENS
We commented on a news story that was posted by the Associated Press titled, “Vatican to Bishops: Follow Law, Report Sex Abuse.” The Vatican decided to add a sentence to its guidelines on sex abuse, making plain the need for bishops to follow civil reporting laws. Here is how AP decided to frame the issue: “Victims, government inquiries and grand juries have all charged that the Catholic Church created what amounted to a conspiracy to cover up abuse by keeping allegations that priests raped and molested children secret and not reporting them to civil authorities.”
Now if there is a conspiracy to cover-up sex abuse, it belongs to the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and media outlets like AP—not the Catholic Church. For example, in 2002, in New York State, it was the New York Civil Liberties Union and Family Planning Advocates (the lobbying arm of Planned Parenthood) that pressured lawmakers not to pass a mandatory reporting law. Why? Because Planned Parenthood counselors learn of cases of statutory rape on a regular basis, and the last thing it wants to do is turn in its clients. New York State bishops, on the other hand, supported the law, but don’t look to AP—or any other news source—to drop the hammer on the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.
There is a cover-up going on all right, and it involves civil libertarian and pro-abortion groups teaming up with the teachers’ unions to stop real reform. Meanwhile, the public is led to believe that the bishops are the guilty party. Add to this the media cover-up of the role that homosexual priests have played in the scandal, and the conspiracy only widens.
April 13: VATICAN CITES ROLE OF HOMOSEXUALITY
On April 12, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican’s secretary of state, said that “there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia.” The number-two Vatican authority cited psychologists and psychiatrists as having made this claim.
It should be obvious to everyone that homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and nothing that Cardinal Bertone said contradicts that fact. But he is right, and his critics are wrong, to say that there is a link between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. To be specific, homosexuals are indeed overrepresented—for whatever reason—as child molesters.
The authorities in a free society have a moral obligation to protect homosexuals from bullying and unjust discrimination. But no amount of political correctness justifies a cover-up: if any group is overrepresented as contributing to a social problem (as are the Irish in relation to alcoholism), then it must be dealt with squarely.
To the extent that practicing homosexuals find it more difficult to enter the priesthood (and this has been true for some time), the sexual abuse scandal will check itself. As a matter of fact, it already has.
April 15: ASSOCIATED PRESS GETS WISE ADVICE
Catholic League president Bill Donohue offers the Associated Press (AP) some words of advice:
What a fabulous story the AP has today on 30 Catholic priests accused of abuse who were transferred or moved abroad. AP put some money into this investigative report: it spans 21 countries in six continents. Now consider the following:
• In October 2007, AP released a report on sexual misconduct committed by public school teachers and found 2,570 cases over a five year period. In fact, it’s much worse than this. As AP disclosed, “Most of the abuse never gets reported.” [Our emphasis.]
• Why does most of the abuse go unreported? “School administrators make behind-the-scenes deals to avoid lawsuits and other trouble. And in state capitals and Congress, lawmakers shy from tough state punishments or any cohesive national policy for fear of disparaging a vital profession.”
• What happens to molesting teachers? “Too often, problem teachers are allowed to leave quietly. That can mean future abuse for another student and another school district.” Indeed, it happens so often it is called “passing the trash” or the “mobile molester.”
• Moreover, “deals and lack of information-sharing allow abusive teachers to jump state lines, even when one school does put a stop to the abuse.”
Advice to AP: Do a story on the “mobile molesters,” using the report on priests as a model, i.e., don’t just write an article—name the names of the teachers, principals and superintendents. Also, track down molesting teachers in Maine where it is illegal to make public the cases of abusing teachers. Go to California and Hawaii where AP was stonewalled in 2007 from getting hard information on molesting teachers, and this time do your own investigating. For more advice, call our office.
May
Sam Harris wrote on Project Reason’s website calling for the arrest of Pope Benedict XVI when he visited England. In his article, Harris called the Church an institution “that preferentially attracts pederasts, pedophiles, and sexual sadists into its ranks, promotes them to positions of authority and grants them privileged access to children.” He continued by saying, “The scandal in the Catholic Church—one might now safely say the scandal that is the Catholic Church—includes the systematic rape and torture of orphaned and disabled children.” (His italics.) His most heinous remark was, “It is no exaggeration to say that for decades (if not centuries) the Vatican has met the formal definition of a criminal organization devoted—not to gambling, prostitution, drugs, or any other venial sin—but to the sexual enslavement of children.”
August
Attorney William McMurry, who sued the Holy See for being complicit in the sexual abuse of his three clients, sought to end the lawsuit; similar suits were still pending. McMurry won a settlement from the Archdiocese of Louisville in 2003 for $25.7 million.
McMurry acknowledged that “Virtually every child who was abused and will come forward as an adult has come forward and sued a bishop and collected money, and once that happens, it’s over.” That’s right—once they got their check, they cashed out. But not McMurry: his motives were more primordial. Which is why he continued.
What collapsed was the heart and soul of McMurry’s interest: his attempt to put Pope Benedict XVI on trial. It was his objective to hold men in Rome accountable for the behavior of men in Louisville, simply because they all worked for the same organization. McMurry knew this was a high bar to clear—proving culpability on the part of the Holy See for what goes on in Kentucky—and so he decided it was a futile exercise.
There was one other reason why McMurry quit: he couldn’t find any more alleged victims. But it was not for lack of trying. He admitted he searched in vain for months looking to find any man who may have been groped. “No one who has not sued a bishop is in a position to help us despite our best efforts over the past several months,” he said.
Just think about it. Every day, for several months, William McMurry and his colleagues went to work in hot pursuit of finding some adult man who may have settled out of court. It did not matter how trivial the offense, how many decades ago it occurred, or how old the alleged victim was, all that mattered was that the offender had to be a priest. No minister, rabbi, school teacher, coach, counselor or psychologist would do. And now the gig is up.
HATE SPEECH
The following is a sample of some of the vitriol that was directed towards Pope Benedict XVI and the Catholic Church during the papal witch-hunt:
Roseanne Barr, “Roseanne World Blog,” April 3: “I am starting to think that any parent who takes their kids to catholic churches from now on should lose custody. Taking your kid where you know sex offenders hang out is inexcusable!!!”
Leonce Gaiter, Huffington Post, April 3: “Now, with evidence that the current Pope enabled the rape of children by his priests through inaction, it is appropriate to examine the Church’s suitability to dictate morality and spirituality to the rest of the world.”
Rosie O’Donnell, “Rosie O’Donnell Show,” April 5: “I mean, if there was an organization, let’s just say the—you know, the—I don’t want to say that, but the Boys’ Club, or one of the—you know, had the history of child abuse—you know, child torture and rape that the Catholic Church has, would you ever give money to the Boys’ Club or the Girls’ Club?…I’m saying that, to support an organization that—at the top of the infrastructure, are people willing to ignore the mass child abuse and torture and sexual molestation of its own constituents. I mean, it’s almost like when you read about—you know, cults, Jonestown and all these cults—that they allow- you know, sexual perversity and sexual behavior.”
Andy Ostroy, Huffington Post, April 7: “The Church remains cavalier in its denial and arrogant defense of itself and of its failed self-policing mechanisms. It acts as if it’s above the law and shrouds itself in secrecy, and its predatory monsters are afforded leniency and forgiveness no other common criminal would receive.”
Cindy Rodriguez, Huffington Post, April 9: “The Church not only attracts sexual deviants, it protects them.”
Michele Somerville, Huffington Post, April 26: “The pimping of children and the readiness to sacrifice them on the altar of Vatican public relations, the fear and distrust of women, and the compulsory celibacy for priests—are all interrelated. They’re bundled in the twisted, deep-rooted tangle of the erotic pathology that burns within and radiates outward from the College of Cardinals, pitting the Church’s venality against the gentleness of the Christ in its people. The Vatican’s megalomaniacal dysfunctions and failures of imagination—which take the forms of misogyny, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and a readiness to victimize its most vulnerable—are inextricably bound; they are low-hanging fruit of the poisoned tree of the Vatican’s commitment to ruling by fear, when it should be guiding by love.”
Christopher Hitchens, Newsweek, May 3: “The case for bringing the head of the Catholic hierarchy within the orbit of law is easily enough made. All it involves is the ability to look at a naked emperor and ask the question ‘Why?’ Mentally remove his papal vestments and imagine him in a suit, and Joseph Ratzinger becomes just a Bavarian bureaucrat who has failed in the only task he was ever set—that of damage control.”
Alex Wilhelm, Huffington Post, May 5: “It does not appear that there was a time that the Church was effective at preventing child abuse—this is a problem that reaches back to the earliest days of its formation and practice.”
MEDIA FEED BIGOTRY
 
Bill Donohue wrote the following article for the June Catalyst demonstrating how the media was instrumental in adding fuel to the fire of anti-Catholicism:
Young people get bits of information from the Internet; urbanites pick up free newspapers stuffed with short stories; others rely on snippets of news from radio or TV; millions depend on wire service stories in their hometown newspapers; and a slim minority are able to access in-depth articles in newspapers and magazines. So when any person or institution is being hammered night after night, a negative impression is bound to stick, independent of whether the “facts” are really facts. Such is the case with the wave of media attacks on the pope.
NewsBusters.com keeps a close eye on the media, and the day after Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times ran her piece on Father Lawrence Murphy, the Wisconsin priest who molested deaf boys extending back to the 1950s, it disclosed that critics of the Church outnumbered defenders by a margin of 13-1 on ABC, CBS and NBC. A few weeks later, the Media Research Center found that 69 percent of the 26 news stories carried by the three networks featured reports that presumed papal guilt.
Given these two factors—the limited amount of hard news consumed by most people these days, and the clear media bias against the Catholic Church—it is hardly surprising to learn that the pope’s “Poor” ratings on handling the abuse scandal literally doubled between 2008 and 2010. However, a month later, it appeared that a backlash had set in, at least among Catholics.
In a New York Times poll taken in late April and early May, the pope’s favorability rating among Catholics had jumped from 27 percent at the end of March (when the abuse stories were just getting started) to 43 percent. The evidence that this was due to a backlash against the media is supported by the finding that 64 percent of Catholics said the media had been harder on the Catholic Church than on other religions; almost half said the abuse stories were blown out of proportion.
The backlash was warranted. Not only that, but much of what was being reported was simply not true, though the misinformation was often passed on as if it were factual. Let’s just take one of the more famous untrue “facts” that have been floated at the expense of the pope, namely, the one that contends that the abuse scandal is widening under the tenure of Pope Benedict XVI. This claim was made by Roland Martin on CNN, as well as by many other commentators.
The real fact of the matter is that, as the John Jay College of Criminal Justice landmark study of 2004 showed, the vast majority of the abuse occurred between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s. Now it is true that we did not hear much about this problem during that time, but it is nonetheless true that by the time the Boston Globe exposed the Boston Archdiocese in 2002, most of the worst of the scandal was behind us. Fast forward to 2010 and what we have now is nothing but a media-driven scandal: the cases recently trotted out go back a half century or more.
The impression that the scandal is widening is also contradicted by the latest report on this issue. Between 2008 and 2009, exactly six credible allegations were made against over 40,000 priests. There is no organization in the world—never mind the United States—that could match this record. Just as important, there is no other institution that is having its old dirty laundry hung out for everyone to see.
If the media were to launch an investigation of Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, public school teachers, camp counselors, psychologists and psychiatrists (to say nothing of stepfathers, boyfriends and other “partners”) then, yes, it’s okay to include Catholics. But when only one group is targeted, and every other one gets a pass, then those who belong to this entity have every right to scream “Witch-Hunt.” In this case, the more apt term would be Papal Witch-Hunt.
The irony is that Pope Benedict XVI has done infinitely more to correct the abuse problem than Pope John Paul II did. It was Benedict who pressed for investigations of priests who had previously escaped an inquiry. It was he who put into place procedures of a more punitive sort. It was he who spoke of the “filth” within the Church. It was he who reopened the case of Father Marcial Maciel Degollado, and is now about to render another judgment on the order he founded, the Legionaries of Christ. It was he who met with the victims. All considered, this is not so much an irony as it is an injustice: Pope Benedict has done much to improve conditions.
One of the most important reforms ushered in by Pope Benedict was the decision to raise the bar on practicing homosexuals. While homosexual men are not per se barred from the seminaries, those who have been gay activists, or are practicing, are. And because the overwhelming majority of victims have been post-pubescent males, the more difficult it is for homosexuals to enter the priesthood, the more likely it is that sexual abuse will continue to decline.
As for the Father Murphy case, the evidence shows that the pope was never personally involved. Yet this didn’t stop Philip Pullella of Reuters from writing that “The New York Times reported the Vatican and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, were warned about Murphy but he was not defrocked.” However, Laurie Goodstein of the Times never said that the pope was personally aware of the Murphy case, and Father Thomas Brundage, the judge in the trial, has said that the pope’s name never came up in discussions in Milwaukee, Washington or Rome.
Just as bad is Cal Thomas, the evangelical writer and activist. He wrote a seriously flawed piece, one that asserted that “The trial was never held.” One wonders whether anyone fact checks his articles. It must be pointed out that the Vatican could have dropped the case (as the civil authorities did in the 1970s), citing the fact that the statute of limitations had expired. But it didn’t.
It was the Murphy case that got the whole media-driven scandal started. And it was not by accident when it happened. On Sunday, March 21, the House passed the health care bill. On Tuesday, March 23, President Obama signed it into law. On Thursday, March 25, the Goodstein piece on Murphy appeared in the Times. What am I getting at?
Health care had dominated the news for weeks in the run-up to the House vote. Now no newspaper that is sitting on what it believes is a major story wants to compete with an issue that literally overwhelms the news. So two days after Obama signed the bill into law, it was safe to pull the trigger. And it worked—the Murphy story took the lead, eclipsing all other news stories. As an added bonus, the following week was Holy Week, guaranteeing massive media coverage of the unfolding scandal. Those who think this was just a coincidence, think again. On the day the Murphy story broke, protesters from SNAP, the professional victims’ group that thrives on scandals, were seen on TV demonstrating in Rome. Was it just a coincidence that they happened to be there? Did they travel to Rome for a pasta special?
So who tipped them off? Jeffrey Anderson. Anderson is the maniacal Catholic-hating attorney who has made an estimated one hundred million dollars suing the Catholic Church (in 2002, he admitted to making $60 million, but he refuses to say how much more he has made in the last eight years). In any event, it was Anderson who fed Goodstein the information for her story on Murphy. How do I know this? Because on CNN she admitted it. Here is what she said an attorney working on this case told her: “I have some interesting documents I think you might want to look at.” Though she does not identify the attorney, this was Anderson’s case.
Back to SNAP. How do we know it was Anderson who tipped them off? Because he is their principal benefactor. Several years ago, Forbes magazine disclosed that Anderson regularly greases SNAP.
See the connection? Anderson, motivated by hatred and greed, goes after the Catholic Church, and he, in turn, gives critical documents to Goodstein, knowing the New York Times would love to nail the Church; and then he gives the heads up to his radical clients, SNAP, who travel to Rome just in time to appear before the TV cameras when the story breaks on March 25.
What is driving Anderson, the Times and SNAP? Anderson’s daughter was once molested by a psychologist who happened to be a former priest. So why doesn’t he sue the American Psychological Association? Because there’s much more money, and fun, to be had sticking it to the Church. As for the Times, as I said in the op-ed ad I wrote on this subject, it hates the Church’s teachings on abortion, gay marriage and women’s ordination so much that it delights in bashing Catholicism. SNAP is fueled by revenge and money: the activists will go to their grave screaming “it’s payback time”; and because they have no other stable job, they thrive on lawsuits and the kick-backs they effectively get from steeple-chasing lawyers.
Another vicious lie is the one that maintains that the Catholic Church handled these abuse cases in a manner that was very different from the way others handled them. Nonsense. Back when the scandal was flourishing, in the 1970s, everyone knew what the drill was: whether the accused was a priest, rabbi, minister, public school teacher, counselor—whomever it was—he was immediately put in therapy. Then, upon a clean bill of health, he was returned to his job.
Was this wrong? In many cases it was. Who pushed for this? Ironically, many of those in the same liberal circles who are now pointing fingers. Back then it was chic to have an analyst, and there wasn’t any psychological or emotional malady that the therapists couldn’t cure. Or so they thought. Indeed, had a bishop sidestepped his advisors—some of whom acted more like therapeutic gurus—and decided to throw the book at the accused, he would have been branded as heartless and un-Christian by the Dr. Feelgood types. So for many of them now to get on their high horse saying there was a cover-up, when in fact what happened was the decision to conform to the prevailing zeitgeist—as understood and promoted by liberals—is sickening.
When the Murphy report on the situation in Dublin was released, one of the major conclusions was that if the bishops had followed canon law, instead of recommending therapy, the scandal may have been avoided. Sadly, this is true.
Yes, big mistakes were made, but the advice and the strategies employed in the Catholic Church were not any different than existed elsewhere. Moreover, all the news about the scandal today is not about new cases, it’s about old ones. So why is the Church being singled out? For the very reason the Catholic League was founded in 1973.
PAPAL U.K. TRIP
After Pope Benedict XVI announced that he would visit the United Kingdom in September, his critics went ballistic. The following is a sample of some of the commentary:
The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, New Scotsman, June 10: “Describing the Papacy as ‘deceitful and unrighteous,’ the Free Presbyterians highlighted recent global exposure of child abuse by Roman Catholic clergy, and suggest the Pope has connived in a cover-up.”
Cristina Odone, Sunday Telegraph, September 5: “Catholics have watched in horror as, almost daily and almost in every country, broken men and women have come forth to tell of their ordeal at the hands of abusive priests.”
Sinead O’Connor, Guardian, September 5: “‘Catholic’ has become a word associated with negativity, with abuse, with violence…. The fact is, tragically, it’s been brought into disrepute by the people running it.”
“Benedict is in no position to call himself Christ’s representative. The pope should stand down, the Vatican should stand down, not only because of the cover-up, they’re incredibly arrogant, they’re anti-Christian. They don’t have the remotest relationship with God.”
Peter Tatchell, Telegraph, September 8: “Benedict XVI put the interests and image of the church before the welfare of children and young people. He is unfit to remain as Pope. He should resign.”
Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society, Irish Post, September 8:“This anti-Catholicism of which Adamus complains is shared by most British Catholics, sickened by their church hierarchy’s dogma driven policies on contraception, homosexuality and even abortion. That is why Mass attendance here has halved in just 20 years and why only a quarter of Catholics agree with the official line on abortion—and fewer still on homosexuality and contraception.”
Bernard Wynne, spokesman for Catholic Voices for Reform, Telegraph, September 8: “The church, I think, is deeply misogynist and we have to change that.”
Julie Burchill, Independent, September 8: “How broad-minded this country is, when we consider that the British taxpayer will shortly be shelling out millions of pounds to protect a former member of the Hitler Youth who believes Anglicans will burn in Hell when the Pope visits this country next week—Just after we commemorate the beginning of the Nazi Blitz on this country!”
“The behaviour of the Church during the Second World War, and to the Jews generally, was vile—and REALLY makes me wonder if it wouldn’t have been possible to pick a Pope who HADN’T been in the Hitler Youth? Closer to home, let alone legions of child-raping holy men, only last week a leading light in the Catholic Church defended its role in moving a priest believed to be involved in three bombings which killed nine people, including Catholics, in the village of Claudy, Co Londonderry, in 1972. The youngest was an eight-year-old girl: ‘suffer little children,’ indeed.”
Christopher Hitchens, Slate.com, September 13: “We have recently been forcibly reminded, the Roman Catholic Church holds it better for the cries of raped and violated children to be ignored, and for the excuses and alibis of their rapists and torturers indulged, and for a host of dirty and willful untruths to be manufactured wholesale, and for the funds raised ostensibly for the poor to be paid out in hush money and shameful bribery, rather than that one tiny indignity or inconvenience to be visited on the robed majesty of a man-made church or any limit set to its self-proclaimed right to be judge in its own cause.”
Peter Tatchell, CNN.com, September 16: “We do not believe that the pope should be honored with a state visit, given his role in the cover up of child sex abuse by Catholic clergy. Even today, he is refusing to hand the Vatican’s secret sex abuse files to the police in countries worldwide. He is protecting the abusers. This makes him complicit with sex crimes against children. Such a person does not deserve the honor of a state visit.”
“Pius XII was no saint. The fact that Pope Benedict wants to makes him a saint shows how far he has strayed from the moral and ethical values of most Catholics and most of humanity.”
Reverend Ian Paisley, September 16: “We are here for a very solemn and serious reason today, the whole day is nonsense…. I have just seen the statement made today which says that if you pay £25 to be at the Mass in Scotland your sins will be forgiven. No man can forgive sins but Christ himself, it is misleading nonsense.”
Andrew Copson, Chief Executive, British Humanist Association website: “The Protest the Pope campaign is calling on the British government to disassociate itself from the Pope’s intolerant teachings on issues such as women’s rights, gay equality and the use of condoms to prevent the spread of HIV.”
“The Pope’s attitude to lesbian and gay people is just one of the many stances that the Vatican State holds which are damaging to human dignity and human rights.”
Pepper Harow, Protest the Pope: “We really think that we got the message across that the Pope is not welcome on a State visit. His outspoken state policies on homosexuality, condoms, education and abortion, as well as the child abuse scandal, continue to affect the rights of millions of individuals across the world and mean that he should not be given the honour of a State visit.”
Atheism UK website: “This is yet another example of hypocrisy of the church. What we have here is an institution that claims moral superiority and preaches respect for life. That it is able to abandon its own teachings when it suits them is deplorable and dishonest. It seems the church does not care what crimes it commits, just so long as they do not get caught. It’s clear that the Catholic Church places the survival of the Institution above the welfare of ordinary men, women and children.”
“We do not wish to see a man who calls himself ‘God’s Vicar on Earth’ and is thereby purely deluded, coming to this country and spreading his poisonous and demonstrable false doctrine to the people of this country, not to mention that he is implicated in the cover up of child rape and that he is making British taxpayers pay for the privilege in these financially troubled times.”
Richard Dawkins, New Humanist Magazine: “Go home to your tin pot Mussolini-concocted principality, and don’t come back.”
Humanist Society of Scotland: “There are particular grounds in Northern Ireland for opposition to the visit. First of all, there is strong evidence that Pope Benedict was complicit in the cover-up of the abuse of children throughout the island by continuing to insist that accusations of paedophilia within the priesthood should be treated by the Church’s own exclusive jurisdiction. Secondly, the Pope’s insistence that the Catholic Church maintains its own schools is prolonging segregated education, which is detrimental to the future of peace.”
Geoffrey Robertson, Human Rights Lawyer: “For 30 years, as Cardinal Ratzinger, from 1981 on, he was in charge of what to do about paedophile priests and he declined on the whole to even defrock them. It’s been many centuries since a Pope has resigned but it would be a very dignified and honourable action.”
“It’s gone on throughout the world. Wherever the church is, there have been abusers.”
National Secular Society Website: “You can show your disapproval of Ratzinger by protesting against the legal bans that the Vatican has fought for on abortion and stem cell research. And also for his obdurate, and breathtakingly irresponsible, opposition to contraception. It fuels a population growth that is unsustainable. Women in poverty-stricken circumstances in countries with dwindling resources are doomed to have large families that they cannot support and who frequently starve. And his using all means, even dishonest ones, to prevent condom use causing untold numbers to die unnecessarily of AIDS because the only known barrier against the disease, condoms, is denied to them.”
“Gay people from around the country will also be coming to put two fingers up to Benedict’s constant defamation and insults…. Make no mistake, the Vatican has declared war on gay people and this is the time to start the fightback.”
“Ratzinger is, without doubt, guilty of enabling this culture of secrecy and betrayal to continue throughout the thirty years he has been at the top of the Vatican hierarchy both as a Cardinal and as Pope. He has done little to correct it because he still considers that the reputation of the church is more important than the future lives of children who are mercilessly abused, indeed raped, by his priests.”
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society: “I cannot believe that we are lauding the head of an organisation that not only insults and denigrates homosexuals, tries to restrict the rights of women by banning contraception and abortion, but deliberately lies about the effectiveness of condoms in the fight against AIDS. This invitation is a rebuke to all those Britons who are incensed by the horrific revelations that are emerging daily about the Vatican’s activities. The Government should be sharply criticising rather than welcoming this man.”
“We are not going to try to arrest the pope, but we do want him to know that his teachings are profoundly inhumane and damaging to so many people.”
“Protest the Pope started as a protest about the cost of this visit, but others have joined that have different issues with Ratzinger – women who want to take their rightful place in the churches life, priests who want to see an end to the celibacy rules, gay people who are—when they are indentified—driven from the seminaries and the priesthood.”