This is the article that appeared in the October 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

There is an important ballot initiative in Ohio this November on the issue of abortion that has generated considerable controversy. The discussion should ideally center on what limits should be placed on abortion. Unfortunately, the pro-abortion side cannot confine itself to this issue, and has chosen instead to take the low road. To be specific, it is flexing its anti-Catholic muscles in public.

Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights is running a TV ad statewide that shows a man kneeling in prayer in a Catholic church. There is a picture of the Sacred Heart of Jesus on one wall, and the Stations of the Cross on another wall.

This imagery is purely demagogic: it is inviting the people of Ohio to think that the Catholic Church is seeking to impose its views on everyone. This is a classic case of Catholic baiting.

The Catholic Church does not impose its teachings on anyone: it proposes what is true, and everyone is free to disagree. Moreover, what the Church teaches about abortion is totally consistent with Biology 101: life begins at conception, and not a day later.

Those who choose to reject what Catholicism and science teach can do so; they can believe whatever they want. What they cannot do is promote anti-Catholic bigotry.

The Ohio coalition supporting this invidious TV ad includes such anti-Catholic groups as Catholics for Choice and Faith in Public Life, both funded by George Soros. We have written about these groups in detail for decades. The bishops have several times condemned Catholics for Choice, and Faith in Public Life has a record of coaching the media on how to manipulate the bishops.

The Catholic League appeals to voters in Ohio to reject this bigoted TV ad. It further asks that those who champion abortion rights denounce this stunt by calling it for what it is—anti-Catholic bigotry.

We contacted the Ohio media and leaders in government at all levels about this disgraceful attack.

This is the article that appeared in the October 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The Catholic Diocese of Cleveland, under the leadership of Bishop Edward C. Malesic, has issued a policy for Catholic parishes and schools on sexuality and gender identity that is a model for all Catholic entities, nationwide. Predictably, LGBT activists and their supporters in the media and politics are unhappy, and some are seriously misrepresenting the policy.

In explaining his position, Bishop Malesic restated Church teachings on this matter. “The human person,” he said, “created in the image and likeness of God, deserves the utmost respect, for each person’s dignity is inherent and inviolable.” This set the tone for his policy.

Contrary to what some are saying, the policy does not forbid students who suffer from gender dysphoria—or confusion about their biological sex—from attending Catholic schools. None will be denied. But what will not be tolerated are public denunciations of Church teachings on sexuality. This would include strictures on homosexuality and gender identity. In other words, everyone is welcome to attend Catholic schools, but no one is allowed to publicly resist what the Church teaches.

Policy specifics include notifying parents if their child is experiencing gender dysphoria. Correct pronouns—those which reflect the biological sex of the student—must be used to describe students. Boys’ bathrooms are for boys, not girls, and vice versa. Sports competition allows only biological girls to compete against girls, not boys who think they are girls.

School functions, such as dances, must respect the biological differences between the sexes. Personal appearances and attire should also reflect these differences. No one may undergo sex-reassignment surgery. And all school records will mirror the biological sex of the student.
None of this should be considered controversial, but in some quarters it is.

Benjamin Huelskamp is an LGBT activist who maintains that “the majority of American Catholics are actually supportive of the LGBTQ community.” Wrong. They are not.

A Pew Research Center survey of Christians last year found that Catholics are considerably more likely to say that “society has become too accepting of transgender people” now than they were in 2017. A plurality of Catholics support requiring students to use the public bathrooms of their biological sex, and a plurality want to make it illegal to teach gender ideology in the schools. Six-in-ten want biological boys and girls to compete against those of their own sex, and not against each other. Almost two-in-three oppose adding new gender options to government documents.

The LGBT Community Center of Greater Cleveland issued a statement saying the Cleveland diocese’s policy used “harmful rhetoric towards the LGBTQ+ community.” This is a lie. It cited not one example.

Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb said that “the new policy forces LGBTQ+ kids to hide their authentic selves and attend school in fear of persecution of who they are.” This is also a lie. It should also be noted that the “authentic selves” of students is their biological sex, not some socially contrived notion of who they think they are.

We are delighted that Bishop Malesic did not shy away from this issue. By issuing a clear and specific policy on sexuality and gender identity he did Catholics in the Cleveland community a favor. Indeed, he did Catholics everywhere a favor.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The clergy sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church has long been over and now it is practically non-existent. To be sure, there continues to be a tiny fraction of the clergy who are offenders, but it has long since been of the magnitude of a scandal. But don’t look to the media to tell you this. And don’t take our word for it—just consult the data.

On p. 41 of the recently released 2022 Annual Report on the Implementation of the “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People,” it lists data on credible allegations against the clergy made between 2004 and 2022:

• 2 percent occurred or began in the 2000s
• 1 percent occurred or began in the 2010s
• Less than 1 percent occurred or began between 2020 and 2022

In short, contemporary news reports about priestly sexual abuse are almost always about alleged offenses that took place decades ago (the 1970s was the worst decade). Quite frankly, as we have known, and as this report makes plain, almost all the abusers are either dead or have been thrown out of ministry.

The 2022 Annual Report considers allegations made between July 1, 2021 and June 30, 2022. It found that there were 16 allegations made by minors during that time, seven of which were substantiated. That means that of the 52,387 members of the clergy (34,344 priests and 18,043 deacons), .013 percent of them had a substantiated allegation made against him.

Importantly, in the first half of 2022, the number of allegations—(not allegations that have been substantiated)—was zero. This should have been highlighted by the authors of the report.

There is no organization in the nation, where adults regularly interact with minors, which has a better record than this. This includes religious as well as secular institutions.

The audit fielded allegations extending back to the 1930s. Almost all the victims were male (82 percent of diocesan/eparchy priests, and 83 percent of religious order priests). Moreover, the majority of the victims were postpubescent (10 years of age and over).

The conclusion should be obvious to those not living in a state of denial: most of the molestation was committed by homosexuals, not pedophiles. When adult males have sex with postpubescent males, that is called homosexuality. The offending priest may consider himself not to be a homosexual, but that subjective opinion does not change the truth. He may consider himself to be a woman, but that has no bearing on reality.

In the period under review, most of the 16 allegations were made by females. This indicates that the crackdown on homosexuals in the priesthood has been successful. The heyday of the scandal was between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s; this was also the period when the Church dropped its guard and allowed homosexuals to thrive in some seminaries and in the priesthood.

Credit must be given to Pope Benedict XVI who instituted a policy that discouraged men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” from seeking entry into the priesthood. Fortunately, Pope Francis has continued this commonsensical policy. Together with the reforms established by the bishops in the United States, this explains why cases of molestation have crashed.

This is good news. But for many reasons, those in and out of the Catholic Church, are reluctant to flag it. That’s too bad. We will.

To learn how the scandal unfolded, see Bill Donohue’s book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes; it is available on Amazon.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The biggest box office surprise of the summer was “Sound of Freedom,” starring Jim Caviezel. In this movie, he portrays a real life Department of Homeland Security agent who quit his job hunting pedophiles to rescue children from sex traffickers in Colombia. The movie has won the applause of Christians, in particular, both for its content and its inspiring message.

Every time a film appears that is welcomed by traditional people of faith, the secular militants on the other side seek to find fault with it. This time was no different, though it turns out that some of the loudest critics were seriously compromised individuals.

Noah Berlatsky is a left-wing activist and former spokesman for Prostasia, a radical foundation. The goal of this entity is to lessen the stigma attached to pedophiles. He hates the movie.

Berlatsky believes we should not call a pedophile a child abuser; he prefers the sanitized term “minor-attracted person,” known as M.A.P.

He objects that by stigmatizing these men, we are casting them as deviants, which, of course, is true.

This champion of “minor-attracted persons” also wrote an article about the autonomy of child sex workers. That’s right. He argues that most children who are forced into being sex slaves are not really coerced into it. Most of them, he says, become prostitutes to survive, which, even if true, does not make those who exploit them any less guilty.

It makes sense that those who want to legalize child prostitution and lessen the stigma attached to it would recoil at a Christian-inspired movie that shines a bright light on this despicable practice. We just didn’t think they would be so bold as to say so publicly.

If you asked 100 Catholics who Roger Haight is, less than one percent would know. That’s the way it should be. Truth to tell, the man is one of the most dishonored Catholic theologians in American history. That’s why he was the recent recipient of the most prestigious award given annually by the Catholic Theological Society of America (CTSA).

CTSA is to Catholic doctrine what the Flat Earth Society is to geography. More about them in a moment.

Roger Haight, like too many Jesuits, has a problem with fidelity. He was censured by the Vatican in 2004 for failing to adhere to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Sandro Magister, the renowned Italian journalist who has covered the Catholic Church for decades, succinctly explained why Haight was censured. It was due to “the loss of substance of key truths of the Christian faith like the preexistence of the Word, the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, the salvific value of the death of Jesus, the unicity and universality of the salvific mediation of Jesus and the Church, the resurrection of Jesus.”

Looks like Haight left nothing on the table. Had he worked at the New York Times and took a pro-life position, he would have been fired. But lucky for him he was just told to stop teaching theology.

Left-wing Catholics are very good at giving each other awards. In fact, they are masters of nepotism. So it was hardly surprising that CTSA would give its top award to Haight; he is a former president of the dissident organization. This kind of political stunt has a long history.

In 1969, CTSA elected Charles Curran president. Like Haight, his heretical views got him in big trouble. In 1997, the organization endorsed women priests. Some critics of CTSA, such as Catholic historian James Hitchcock, blame it for punishing orthodox Catholic faculty members.

Worse still is CTSA’s role in promoting the clergy sexual abuse scandal.

In the 1970s, it commissioned a book by Father Anthony Kosnik, Human Sexuality: New Directions in American Catholic Thought, that was used in seminaries across the nation. Kosnik taught that homosexual acts were not intrinsically evil, arguing instead that they need “to be evaluated in terms of their relational significance.” In doing so, he rejected Catholic sexual ethics as it had been understood throughout the ages.

Kosnik even went so far as to question the validity of condemning bestiality, never mind homosexuality. Human sexuality, he said, should be “self-liberating” and “joyous.” He was as blunt as anything found in Playboy. “The importance of the erotic element, that is, instinctual desire for pleasure and gratification, deserves to be affirmed and encouraged.”

The book won first prize by the Catholic Press Association.

As Bill Donohue argued in The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse, a normal seminarian who read this stuff would not be enticed to molest a minor. But an abnormal one—and the seminaries were loaded with disordered men in the 1970s—would likely interpret what Kosnik said as a green light.

It was not priests who were sexually uptight who preyed on adolescents—it was priests who followed their libido, not their vows. CTSA should own up to its destructive role. Ditto for the National Catholic Reporter, which to this day praises guys like Kosnik and Haight.

This is the article that appeared in the October 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Several hundred American Muslim scholars and preachers have signed a statement affirming Islamic opposition to the radical LGBT agenda. Most of what the statement says could be accepted by orthodox Catholics, Protestants and Jews.

“Today, Islamic sexual and gender ethics are at odds with certain recently popular societal views, causing tension for Muslims between their religious beliefs and societal expectations. At the same time, public disapproval of LGBTQ practices, beliefs, and advocacy is increasingly met with charges of intolerance and unwarranted accusations of bigotry. More troubling still, there is an increasing push to promote LGBTQ-centric values among children through legislation and regulations, disregarding parental consent and denying both parents and children the opportunity to express conscientious objection.”

The statement is peppered with quotes from the Quran restating God’s definition of humanity as consisting of male and female. Old Testament verses found in Genesis say the same.

There is nothing incendiary or irresponsible about the statement. The signatories simply wanted to go on record respectfully disagreeing with transgenderism, the ideology that falsely claims the sexes are interchangeable. They are not, and every honest person knows that sex is binary—we are either male or female.

What is particularly impressive about this document is that it is not at all defensive. People of faith, in this instance Muslims, who refuse to bow to elitist conceptions of sexuality should rightly object to accusations of bigotry made against them. They are merely being faithful to the tenets of their creed, and to common sense, as well.

We need to have more interaction between the leaders of the Abrahamic religions—Christianity, Islam and Judaism—on these current moral issues. If we stand together, we can defeat the zealots who want to push their radical agenda on us.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

As the fight for parental rights continues to gain momentum, and more importantly scores crucial wins, those in the forefront of this movement have received increased hostility. The most prominent of these groups is Moms for Liberty: left-wing activists have declared war on these moms.

Consider what happened in July at the Moms for Liberty “Joyful Warriors” Summit in Philadelphia. In the weeks leading up to the event, the Philadelphia chapter of ACT UP, a gay activist group with a history of violence, led several protests outside the Marriott demanding that the hotel cancel the event. Protesters “gave speeches, waved trans pride flags, and explained why it was so important to deny Moms for Liberty a space to tout their dangerously homophobic, transphobic rhetoric.”

During the event, protesters held up signs that insulted the group. One referred to them as the “nastiest skank b*tch[es] I’ve ever met.” Another called the group “fascist.” A couple blocks from the convention center, vandals spray painted graffiti on a crosswalk that read “F*ck off Nazi Moms!”

In large part, this vitriol is a direct result of a campaign to tarnish Moms for Liberty by secular progressive activists. This past June, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a radical left-wing organization, added Moms for Liberty to the group’s “hate map.” SPLC’s hate map includes many prominent conservative groups and equates them to the Ku Klux Klan. Additionally, GLAAD, a radical LGBT group, issued a warning that Moms for Liberty’s “advocacy has included calls for book bans, classroom censorship, and bans on teaching about slavery, race, racism and LGBTQ people and history.”

While leftist radicals portray Moms for Liberty as a scourge, the reality of the group is much different from the narratives concocted by their foes.

On January 1, 2021, Moms for Liberty, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization, was founded by two former and one current Florida school board officials who were all mothers concerned about what their children were learning in schools.

Presently, Moms for Liberty has 285 chapters in 45 states and approximately 120,000 members. While the group does not have a demographic profile of its members, it mainly draws support from parents that are concerned about the state of education in their communities.

Initially, Moms for Liberty focused on the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly the closing of schools, facemask requirements, and vaccine mandates. More recently, members of the organization have taken leading roles in fighting Critical Race Theory and the radical LGBT agenda in the classroom.

As a 501(c)(4), Moms for Liberty is actively supporting candidates in school board races across the country. In 2022, Moms for Liberty chapters endorsed 500 school board candidates. The organization has a 50 percent win ratio nationwide. In its base of Florida, Moms for Liberty has an 80 percent win ratio.

The successful efforts of Moms for Liberty has made them into a powerful organization. For instance, nearly every Republican candidate for the White House has praised these moms, and the candidates have put aside their differences to rally to the group’s aid.

During the “Joyful Warriors” Summit, Former President Donald Trump praised the group claiming it is the best thing “that’s ever happened to America.” He went on to say that “Moms for Liberty is no hate group. You are joyful warriors, you are fierce, fierce patriots.”

At the same event, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis spoke in defense of the group saying, “I see that Moms for Liberty is coming under attack by the left, attack by the corporate media, protests out here in the streets….But I want to congratulate you for that because that is a sign we are winning this fight.”

But even with powerful allies, the enemies of parental rights in education continue to bash Moms for Liberty. Unsurprisingly, one of the favored lines of attacks on these moms is they are “Christian Nationalists.”

Consider that in the spring of 2022, a group called Defense of Democracy was founded with the sole purpose of counteracting Moms for Liberty. One of the founders said the goal of the organization was “to fight back against Christian nationalism.”

Similarly, McMaster University Public Intellectuals Project lamented that the Moms for Liberty advocates “for a White Christian nationalist view of the United States.” Likewise, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State ran a hit piece on Moms for Liberty titled “Mad Moms: A New Christian Nationalist Front Group Claims To Champion Parental Involvement In Public Education” decrying the group’s activities. Meanwhile, op-eds and articles have appeared across the nation lambasting these moms and their supposed ties to “Christian Nationalism.”

This effort to defame proponents of traditional Judeo-Christian values reveals a deep seated animus against people of faith taking an active role in society. Unfortunately, Moms for Liberty has become a target of this line of attack.

Ultimately, the same people seeking to indoctrinate children into supporting leftist causes are openly hostile to people of faith. They seek to eliminate not only parents having a say in their children’s education but people of faith taking part in public life. Fortunately, patriots and people of faith, like Moms for Liberty, are fighting back and winning.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Bob Iger has been hanging around Disney seemingly forever, and every time he quits, he re-retires (he’s done so at least three times).

When he left as CEO in 2021, he managed to become executive chairman, keeping an eye on his successor, Bob Chapek. Last November, Chapek was shown the door, and Iger jumped back in the saddle as CEO again. He was supposed to retire at the end of 2024, but now that date has been extended to December 31, 2026. He definitely has a grip on the Disney board.

In 2021, Iger’s total compensation was $46 million, more than double what he earned the previous year. His new contract includes an annual bonus equal to 500 percent of his annual salary. Disney chairman Mark Parker says he’s worth every penny of it. But is he?

Iger has been busy cutting costs: 7,000 employees lost their jobs, saving Disney $5.5 billion. The bread and butter of Disney has long been TV (which includes ESPN), but its earnings have taken a major hit. Iger is banking on revenue from streaming services, but that isn’t working out too well: it is losing subscribers, and the streaming division has lost more than $10 billion since it launched its flagship service Disney+ in late 2019.

Disney movies are tanking at the box office. “Elemental,” the Pixar film with a “non-binary” character, posted a budget of $200 million before publicity costs; the only question left is how big a hit it will take. Its first weekend box office receipts of $29.5 million was Disney’s worst-ever opening weekend tally. What saved it from being a disaster were the box office receipts from overseas.

Hopes were high at Disney for “The Little Mermaid” and “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” but no longer. In both cases, some trendy elements were added, but the public didn’t bite. By contrast, consider how well some other Disney movies have done.

“Raiders of the Lost Ark”
Budget $18 million
Box Office $390 million

“Temple of Doom”
Budget $28 million
Box Office $333 million

“The Last Crusade”
Budget $48 million
Box Office $474 million

“Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”
Budget $185 million
Box Office $790 million

Grand Total:
Budget $279 million
Box Office $1.987 billion

Even the famous Disney parks are not lighting up the sky; traffic is way down. Hollywood Studios had the third-slowest day on July 4 in the past year, not exactly a good omen moving forward. The Magic Kingdom park, famous for its long lines, is now a short wait. One reason for this is the ever-increasing cost of tickets. Families are fed up.

Shareholders are also not happy with Disney’s performance. Its share price is trading at around $90 or less, the worst outcome in a decade. Two years ago shares were $190. Since Iger’s return, Disney’s stock is down 2 percent. Worse, Disney is sky-high in debt, owing $45 billion. This is not sustainable.

It is more than increasing costs that are plaguing Disney: a series of bad decisions, offending Americans who hold to the traditional moral values that Walt Disney represented, are to blame. By pushing the gay and trans agenda, it has turned off parents across the country.
At work is more than venality—stupidity reigns supreme.

The Christian-inspired movie, “Sound of Freedom,” is such a hit that it took in north of $200 million. Considering that it cost a mere $15 million to make, any company would be happy to own it. Amazingly, Disney did.

The movie was completed in 2018 and was then bought by 20th Century Fox for distribution. In 2019, Disney acquired 20th Century Fox and all of its entertainment assets, including “Sound of Freedom.” And what did it do with it? Nothing. For five years it refused to release it to theaters or make it available for streaming services. After years of haggling, Disney sold it to Angel Studios for a song.

Disney apparently wanted nothing to do with a movie that appealed to religious folks. It is much more at home appealing to radical gay and transgender people, even when its receipts are going south. This shows a supreme stupidity, to say nothing of morally corrupt values.

The Catholic League’s award-winning documentary, “Walt’s Disenchanted Kingdom,” debuted in January and has been seen by millions of viewers; it is available on several platforms, including Amazon Prime. It details how the once family-friendly giant turned against its base by getting in bed with left-wing activists and educators.

Bill Donohue has been clashing with Iger for decades, extending back to the mid-1990s when Disney bought out ABC; he was the head honcho. He presided over a whole lot of anti-Catholic fare. Nowadays, he is presiding over entertainment that is junk food for the mind.

Iger is partly to blame for this sorry outcome. It remains to be seen if Disney will shed its woke brand of politics and get back to normal. If it doesn’t, it will get what it deserves.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Irish singer Sinead O’Connor passed away on July 28.

In her better years, she sold millions of record albums, winning a Grammy for her work.

She became an overnight sensation in 1992 when she appeared on “Saturday Night Live” and ripped up a picture of Pope John Paul II. Her antics, often controversial, were condemned not only by rank-and-file Catholics, but by celebrities such as Madonna and Frank Sinatra.

The “SNL” stunt was uncalled for, but it was her advocacy of violence that was more disturbing. In 2011, she warned Pope Benedict XVI not to come to Ireland, saying that if he did there would be a “f***in bloodbath.”

O’Connor was also delusional, perhaps a reflection of her drug habits. In 1999, she announced that she had become a priest; she even wore priestly attire. She described herself as Mother Bernadette Mary and claimed to have the authority to say Mass and administer the Sacraments.

Bill Donohue once debated her on Larry King’s CNN show on the subject of clergy sexual abuse. The discussion floundered when she had to ask King, “What does postpubescent mean?” Donohue had just mentioned that most of the abuse involved postpubescent males.

When she died, many celebrities and talking heads in the media lionized her for her “bravery” in ripping up a picture of the pope. Her fans commended her for calling attention to clergy sexual abuse.

A Facebook page was set up, saying, “Apologize to Sinead O’Connor NOW.”

But Sinead was not some great scholar who commanded great prescience. In fact, she was a troubled soul who was badly educated. She was no more a “truth-teller” than were those who worshipped her.

The Associated Press (AP) had an embarrassing article on Sinead. It cited as authoritative the pro-Sinead remarks of David Clohessy, the man who once headed the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). He had to leave in disgrace. As Donohue showed in his book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse, he was shown to be an utter fraud. The Catholic League was pleased to have played a major role in his ouster.

AP reported that Clohessy was in his early 30s when Sinead pulled her “SNL” stunt. It said that “he had only recently recalled the repressed memories of the abuse he suffered.” Never mind that the idea of “repressed memory” has been thoroughly discredited—no serious psychologist defends it anymore—Clohessy has said that his memory of what allegedly happened to him was jarred when he and his fiancée were watching a Barbra Streisand movie. That would do it.

Michael McDonnell was quoted in the AP article speaking favorably about Sinead. He was identified as the “interim executive director” of SNAP. What readers didn’t know is that poor Mike has been the “interim director” for quite some time now. The reason he is still “interim” is because SNAP does not exist anymore. It’s nothing but his cell phone.

AP also cited comments by Jamie Manson, the lesbian head of an anti-Catholic pro-abortion group, Catholics for Choice. Manson said that when Sinead ripped up the picture of the pope she was “feeling a call to the priesthood at the time.” “Now if a male Catholic activist said he once felt called to be a nun,” Donohue said, “wouldn’t it make sense to call the mental health hotline?”

Molly Olmstead at Slate wrote a beauty. She went after Pope John Paul II for his “role” in covering up the scandal. The link she provided was to a story by National Public Radio saying the pope was aware of accusations against homosexual predator, and former cardinal, Theodore McCarrick.

The pope should have listened to New York Archbishop John Cardinal O’Connor. He had McCarrick’s number and explained in detail to the Vatican why he was alarmed. Instead the pope was persuaded by two high-ranking Vatican officials who took McCarrick’s side. He heeded the wrong advice, but this is not the same as instituting a cover-up.

Olmstead resurrected the fictitious tales about the Magdalene Laundries, where Sinead stayed, so she could bash the Catholic Church. As Donohue recounted in his monograph, “Myths of the Magdalene Laundries,” data contained in what is known as the “McAleese Report” demonstrate that these homes for wayward girls that were run by nuns were not anything like its harshest critics have alleged. No one was imprisoned, forced to stay or engage in slave labor. Not a single woman was sexually abused by a nun. Not one. It is all a lie.

It is true that Sinead was sexually abused. But not by a nun—it was her own mother who molested her. So it was hardly surprising that her father decided that she would be better off being taken care of by the nuns.

Olmstead said that “Bill Donohue of the Catholic League led the public charge against O’Connor back in 1992.” Donohue replied, “I would have been happy to do so, but I didn’t become president until 1993.”

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

When someone says he is “not big on” something, it indicates that he is not a fan. There may be many reasons for this—the smell of brussel sprouts is enough to deter some from eating them—but it is a rare occurrence when someone who is “not big on” something winds up vigorously endorsing it. President Biden is one of those rare persons.

Over the summer, Biden admitted he is “not big on abortion.” He did not say why. After all, he vigorously supports abortion for every conceivable reason, and at any time during pregnancy. Indeed, he even supports partial-birth abortion.

After he made this remark, he was quick to say that the decision in Roe v. Wade making abortion a constitutional right (since overturned) was the right thing to do. Too bad reporters never ask him to explain himself.