It is one of the biggest myths of our day to say the United States is a religiously diverse nation. It manifestly is not. But there is a lot of money, and ideological investment, at stake in pretending otherwise. Consider the following.

A Pew Research Center study on global religious diversity was released on April 4: with the exception of the Washington Times, not a single large-circulation newspaper in the nation ran a story on it.

The study found that “from a global perspective, the U.S. really is not at all that religiously diverse.” Indeed, “95% of the U.S. population is either Christian [78%] or religiously unaffiliated, while all other religions combined account for less than 5% of Americans. As a result, the U.S. ranks 68th out of 232 countries and territories.” Similarly, as a Gallup poll found, 95% of all Americans who identify with a religion are Christian.

The Pew study classified the U.S. as “moderate” in terms of religious diversity. With good reason: Jews are 1.8%, Buddhists are 1.2%, Muslims are .9%, Hindus are .6%, and folk religions are .2%. Moreover, the U.S. is less religiously diverse than such nations as Jamaica, Bermuda, France, Germany, Sweden, Tanzania, and Ethiopia.

The media blackout is not hard to explain: the data undercut the multicultural argument used by anti-Christian organizations. We are overwhelmingly Christian, and as such we should not flinch from acknowledging this verity whenever appropriate. Our roots are Judeo-Christian; they are not Hindu-Islamic.

BishopAccountability.org purports to be an abuse watchdog, but in reality its only real agenda is to discredit the Catholic Church. Its latest stab at Pope Francis brings further discredit to its reputation. Indeed, it represents McCarthyism.

BishopAccountability.org highlights five cases where Cardinal Bergoglio may have had knowledge of abuse allegations, but it is clear that it has no evidence that he knew about any of these cases. Moreover, only one of the priests was an archdiocesan priest from Buenos Aires (more on him below); two were religious order priests and two were from other dioceses.

The report estimates that between 1950 and 2013, “more than 100 Buenos Aires archdiocesan priests offended against children.” Again, the report cites no evidence for this claim. It further undermines its credibility when it makes a strained analogy: it compares the size of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires to the number of priests accused in the dioceses of Manchester, New Hampshire; Providence, Rhode Island and Los Angeles, California. Even a high school dropout would have chosen a Latin American analogy.

The report tries to sound authoritative by compiling a list of 42 clergy who have been accused of abuse in Argentina. Perhaps it thought that no one would check its own sources. We did. Here is what we found:

•  Thirty-four of those priests had no connection to the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires.
• One was acquitted when the allegations could not be proved.
• One was tried in the U. S. and the charges were dismissed before he moved to Argentina.
• One priest admitted to abusing a 15-year-old in the Diocese of Quilmes, and was transferred to the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires to live.
• One priest was credibly accused in the United States, and was then assigned to missionary work by his order. He was sent to Buenos Aires in August 2013, after Bergoglio was elected pope.
•  One priest was accused of abuse in Uruguay, and was then transferred to Buenos Aires.

Of the three remaining clerics, only one was an archdiocesan priest, Father Carlos Maria Gauna. He was accused of inappropriately touching two girls (he allegedly touched their buttocks) at a Catholic school, and was disciplined as a result. One was a Marianist brother, and there is no evidence that Bergoglio ever heard about, much less failed to report him. Finally, he is accused of commissioning a “secret” study of a Salesian priest, aimed at discrediting the accuser, but absolutely no evidence is provided to support this charge.

We sent a copy of our response to the heads of each U.S. diocese.

On March 11, 2014, the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office announced that they would not file charges against St. Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt; he was accused in December of “inappropriately touching” a young man in 2009.

When the charges were first made in December, Bill Donohue said, “Archbishop Nienstedt has been the subject of a non-stop crusade orchestrated by ex-Catholics, and Catholics in rebellion against the Church, simply because he stands for everything they are not: he is a loyal son of the Catholic Church.” Donohue noted that “out of the blue” came an unidentified male who claims he was touched on his buttocks in 2009 by the archbishop while posing for a group photo.

After the accusation was made, the police identified and interviewed everyone who was in the photograph when the archbishop allegedly touched the boy’s buttocks. No one at the Confirmation ceremony reported seeing anything like this happening. The photo shows Nienstedt standing behind the boy, one step up, meaning that he would have had to bend down to touch the boy’s behind. Moreover, the photo shows Nienstedt with one hand on his crozier and the other on the boy’s left shoulder.

The police asked if anyone recalled a touching episode meant as a joke, or saw any touching between people, or remembered if someone was startled during the photo session. The answer to all three was unanimous: No.

Archbishop Nienstedt is a good man who was unfairly accused. We never doubted his veracity.

The Catholic League chose Monday, March 3 to make a special tribute to Pope Francis on the op-ed page of the New York Times; it is ten days before his one-year anniversary as the leader of over one billion Catholics. We will publish our op-ed ad in the next edition.

By all accounts, the pope has won the acclaim not only of practicing Catholics, but of many who have fallen away. Those from other religions, as well as many who are not religious, have also recognized his gifts: he is a populist pope, one who resonates well with the average person.

We chose to make a statement in the nation’s most influential newspaper the week before the Holy Father’s special day because we wanted to influence the impending discussion on his first year. To be exact, we are concerned about those who have previously been at odds with the Vatican, but are now trying to claim the pope as one of their own. These are more than cafeteria Catholics—they are playing politics.

In other words, some of his new fans have an agenda. They want practicing Catholics to think that Pope Francis is unhappy with their traditional focus on the rights of the unborn and other cultural issues. This is untrue, but it is an idea that has gained currency: it is not the pope who feels this way; rather, it is those who seek to alter public discourse on some important Catholic teachings.

Owing in large part to Pope Francis’ relaxed style of conversing with the media, his words have proven to be fodder to those who are bent on parsing them. Some of the misinterpretations may be innocent, but some are not: the deliberate twisting of his comments to fit a particular  political vision is not uncommon.

What is particularly odious is the increasing tendency of agenda-ridden Catholics to trash Pope Benedict XVI, as well as Blessed Pope John Paul II: this is done so that their inflated image of Pope Francis stands in sharp contrast to Benedict and John Paul. What they hope to achieve is a sense of momentum—things are moving their way and we need to get in line. Their goal is as transparent as it is dishonest.

The Catholic League loves all three popes, and we implore everyone to give due recognition to their very different strengths. But to those who constantly look at the world through a political lens, there are good popes (Francis) and bad ones (his predecessors). This is a jaundiced view of reality, and it is unfair to all of them.

Congratulations Pope Francis!

The U.S. Supreme Court has put the brakes on the infamous Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate that would force Catholic non-profits, and objecting private businessmen, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization. The issue has yet to be fully resolved.

On January 24, the Supreme Court issued an injunction blocking enforcement of the HHS mandate. It affirmed Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s New Year’s Eve order in the case; she acted on an appeal from the Little Sisters of the Poor to stop enforcement of the edict.

The issue was decided on procedural grounds. The high court enjoined the Obama administration from enforcing the mandate on the sisters while the case is pending before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

What is significant about this ruling is that it weakens the administration’s argument that it was accommodating Catholic non-profits by allowing the Little Sisters to designate a third-party administrator to provide for these morally objectionable services.

The record is mixed on the many appeals heard by the courts on this issue; we have won some, and lost some. That is why the Supreme Court will eventually decide this matter once and for all.

It is revealing that among those who are working against the First Amendment religious liberty rights of Americans are many atheist and left-wing civil liberties organizations. So-called victims’ groups are also involved, as are Catholic dissident groups. We expect them to lose in the end.

There are signs that the “War on Christmas” is abating. That the Catholic League has had something to do with it is questioned by no one.

In 2013, we laid down our anchor, sending a message to militant atheists: we will not allow you to occupy the public square unanswered. To be specific, we displayed a gigantic Christmas billboard in Times Square, and we posted digital billboards along two New Jersey highways. We are proud of the fact that we have led the pro-Christmas side of the Christmas wars for two decades.

In 1994, we scored our first major victory when we successfully pressed Barneys, the upscale clothier on Madison Avenue, to remove an obscene manger scene from its storefront window. We erected a nativity scene in Central Park a year later, something we’ve done every year since. In subsequent years, we’ve been actively engaged in scores of skirmishes, winning some and losing some.

An examination of Catholic League activities in the “War on Christmas” is not dispositive, but it is an index of what has been happening in the dominant culture. Our records show that our involvement peaked in the years 2005-2007. Those were the years when we took on Wal-Mart, exacting an apology after we threatened a boycott following revelations that the mega-store was discriminating in its treatment of Christmas. Things got so bad that Jackie Mason and other Jewish leaders joined with us in protesting anti-Christmas attacks.

In 2013, we saw a clear downward tick in attempts to bash Christmas. Indeed, even vandalism was down: the number of nativity scenes being trashed was relatively low. But not all was well. As usual, public schools and public parks were targeted.

As compared to previous years, the “War on Christmas” in 2013 was led more by national organizations, and less by local activists, than ever before. American Atheists, Freedom from Religion Foundation, the Secular Humanist Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation led the way.

This past Christmas, a decided pushback was evident, involving local residents: they took things into their own hands, pressuring local authorities to accede to their reasonable demands.

Contrary to those who sell the bogus idea that the “War on Christmas” is not real, Christians who are fighting back are not obsessed with who is saying “Happy Holidays,” and who is saying “Merry Christmas.” On the contrary, they are fighting those who are bent on banning, trashing, and diluting the public expression of Christmas.

Two days after Christmas, a Pennsylvania appeals court overturned the conviction of Philadelphia Monsignor William Lynn; he was later released on bail. Msgr. Lynn should never have been prosecuted in the first place: he was charged ex post facto; a 2007 amendment to the 1972 Pennsylvania child endangerment statute had no application to him.

The guilty parties that worked overtime to convict an innocent man—they include attorneys, judges, newspapers, professional “victims’ groups,” activists, TV talking heads—have been disgraced. This is a monumental win for justice, and a tremendous setback for anti-Catholic bigots. Their goal is to “get a bishop,” and if that doesn’t work, then they settle for the next in line.

Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham began this witch-hunt—she was authorized to pursue sexual misconduct in all religious communities, but instead she selectively chose to focus exclusively on Catholics—and then she passed the baton to her successor, Seth Williams. All of them knew that Msgr. Lynn did not know, or know of, the drug-addicted, lying, scheming, accuser, Billy Doe.

Msgr. Lynn spent 18 months in prison because of dishonest people who harbor an anti-Catholic agenda. D.A. Williams pushed to declare him a “flight risk,” as if Lynn is going to hop a plane to Rome. He is being unfairly monitored.

Congratulations to Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput and attorney Thomas A. Bergstrom for staying the course.

Within hours of registering a formal complaint with the top Army brass at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, a female Catholic soldier’s rights were restored. More important, reforms were immediately put into place guaranteeing the religious liberty rights of Catholics on the base.

After learning that a female soldier enrolled in Advanced Individual Training at the base had thrice been denied the opportunity to go to Mass on Sundays, Bill Donohue wrote to Major General Mark McDonald at Fort Sill’s U.S. Army Fires Center of Excellence.

Donohue noted that the “battle buddy” system they have requires soldiers to travel in pairs. He conceded that this arrangement surely has its merits, but he hastened to say that “it is not an adequate defense to deny someone her constitutional rights simply because there are no other Catholics in her unit.” He added that a cadre escort “would resolve this matter, while not doing anything to undermine the policy of moving about in pairs.”

The Catholic League president personalized his concerns. “I am a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, and have nothing but respect for the men and women of the armed services. But I am also the president of the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, and as such, I take anti-Catholicism very seriously, regardless of the motive of the offender.”

Donohue called for an investigation into this matter. He was pleased when he received an e-mail indicating that his complaint was being taken seriously. Donohue then called the base and spoke to the official who had contacted him. The conversation was amicable, and it resulted in assurances that a cadre escort service would be arranged for those soldiers who lacked a fellow Catholic to “buddy” with. Case closed.

The reason we jumped on this issue transcended the incident at Fort Sill. There is an attack on the religious liberty rights of Catholics and Protestants in the armed forces, and in the military academies. Militant atheists are driving it, and obsequious officers are yielding to the pressure. We refuse to do so.

The goal is to censor religious expression in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and the Coast Guard, as well as on the campuses of the academies. The stakes are high: If the professional atheists can win there, they can win anywhere. This isn’t about fidelity to the First Amendment—it’s about trampling on it. Atheists are not being persecuted by the faithful; it’s the other way around.

We are happy that this incident ended quickly and fairly.

The Catholic League’s enormous Times Square billboard (click here) sends a message that is both joyful and serious: Christians will not allow the Scrooges in our society to stop us from honoring Jesus.

Scrooges are trying to censor Christmas again. In Bordentown, New Jersey the superintendent of schools initially sought to ban religious Christmas music from school concerts. Following an outcry from parents, and the intervention of the Alliance Defending Freedom, the decision was reversed. The same issue arose in Wisconsin’s Wausau West High School, but sanity ultimately prevailed there, too.

In College Park, Georgia parents were told that at a charter school, all religious songs were prohibited. The educators proved their lameness when they allowed Feliz Navidad to be sung: if the kids can sing “Merry Christmas,” what do the administrators think they are celebrating?

A South Carolina charter school went so far as to cancel the annual toy drive because atheists said it would convert kids to Christianity. They’re worried about that—it’s not something a free society can tolerate.

Leading the anti-Christmas wars are American Atheists, Freedom From Religion Foundation and the American Humanist Association. These groups are driven by bigotry, not the Constitution. Unfortunately, there is a lot of ignorance among school officials about what is permissible and what is not.

The Catholic League will proudly display its billboard, and will erect a life-size nativity scene in Central Park. Scrooge won’t beat us.

On October 12, California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a bill that would have allowed adults who were allegedly molested when they were a minor to file lawsuits, provided the abuse occurred in a private institution. The bill would have lifted the statute of limitations for one year.

Governor Brown saw right through the machinations of those who selectively sought to allow alleged victims of sexual abuse another chance to file suit. He properly noted that legislation passed a decade ago already covered the Catholic Church, so there was no need to do so again.

Most important, Brown denounced the politics involved. “This extraordinary extension of the statute of limitations, which legislators chose not to apply to public institutions, is simply too open-ended and unfair,” he said.

On September 10, Bill Donohue wrote a six-page letter to Governor Brown citing his concerns.” This legislation is being sold as an antidote to the sexual abuse of minors,” he said. “In fact, it only applies to the private sector, thus allowing all alleged victims at the hands of public school employees off the hook,” he added. Donohue branded the bill “discriminatory and flagrantly unjust.”

Donohue also cited the sexual abuse of students at Miramonte Elementary School in Los Angeles, offering a detailed description of what happened; over half of Donohue’s letter was on Mira-monte. His point was plain for anyone to see: these students would be excluded from the bill sponsored by Sen. James Beall Jr., simply because they were abused at a public school.

Donohue was delighted that Governor Brown saw fit to mention Miramonte in his statement. The governor said those students who were assaulted “are no less worthy because of the institution they attended.”

The Catholic League contacted over 1,000 parishes in California, all the lawmakers, and every one of our members in the state asking them to demand justice. But the real heroes are the bishops of California, led by Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez. We are so happy that Gomez pulled out all the stops.

The final proof that this bill was driven more by anti-Catholicism than any alleged interest in child welfare came when Republicans tried to amend the Beall legislation to include public institutions. It was defeated. To engage in bigotry is always wrong, but it is particularly despicable when it is done under the guise of protecting children.

It is always gratifying when those we help are thankful for our efforts, and that was certainly true in this effort. Kudos to Governor Jerry Brown.