The Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate forcing Catholic non-profits to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization will not kick in on August 1, as scheduled; an extension has been granted to January 1, 2014. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ initial reaction was cautious; a complete analysis of the final rules is forthcoming.

There are some changes in the rules worth noting, but they are not satisfactory. Attempts to distance Catholic non-profits from directly providing insurance coverage for these morally objectionable services are admirable, but we’ve been there before: five months ago we were told that more in the way of accommodation was forthcoming, and we applauded that gesture. But now we know that the Obama administration has come up short.

There were some encouraging signs in late June: in two separate rulings, the courts sided with business owners who challenged the enforcement of the HHS mandate. One was a circuit court of appeals ruling in Denver, and the other was a federal district case in Florida. In both cases, Hobby Lobby and Beckwith Electric, respectively, the rulings were decisive.

The Catholic community, and many others, are not asking for anything new: all we are asking for is to respect the status quo ante as it applies to this issue. It is not people of faith who sought this confrontation—it is President Obama. No matter, it is likely the Supreme Court will eventually decide this issue.

When news stories surfaced on the way the IRS was selectively targeting conservative and religious groups, Bill Donohue decided the time had come to reveal his story.

Just weeks after Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, Donohue was notified by the IRS that the Catholic League was under investigation for violating the IRS Code on political activities as it relates to 501(c)(3) organizations. What the IRS did not know was that Donohue had proof who contacted them to launch the investigation: Catholics United, a George Soros-funded Catholic organization.

The IRS was contacted on June 5, 2008 to launch a probe of the Catholic League, and the letter sent to Donohue was dated November 24, 2008. The June 5 letter was sent to the IRS by lawyers from Catholics United; one of the persons who it was mailed to was Lois G. Lerner, the woman cited in the current IRS scandal.

The “evidence” was nothing more than news releases and articles that Donohue had written during the presidential campaign on various issues. The lawyers also asked the IRS to question the source of new funding we had received, implying that we received illegal contributions.

The timing was not coincidental. On October 20, Donohue issued a news release, “George Soros Funds Catholic Left,” and on October 23, he wrote another one, “Catholic Left Scandal Mounts”; both mentioned Catholics United. The same day, October 23, he was asked to go on CNN, and when Catholics United found out, they contacted the station trying to spike the interview.

The person who did this was the head of Catholics United, Chris Korzen. He said Donohue was not “an authentic Catholic commentator and representative of the Catholic Church,” and that they should either drop him altogether or put him on with Alexia Kelley of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (Catholics United is listed on the 990 of Catholics in Alliance as a related organization; Soros greases this group, and by extension, Catholics United).

The bid to keep Donohue off TV failed. But here’s the key: Korzen was dumb enough to share with CNN the complaint issued by his group to the IRS. The document, which was leaked by someone at CNN, matches nicely with the IRS complaint of November 24.

In the end, the IRS concluded that although the Catholic League had “intervened in a political campaign,” it was “unintentional”; thus, our tax-exempt status remained intact.

Old-time rock star David Bowie made a splash with his new video that accompanies his song, “The Next Day.”

The video is strewn with characteristic excess: one priest bashes a homeless man, while others are busy hitting on women; self-flagellation is depicted; a dancing gal with bleeding hands makes a stigmata statement; and a customer is served eyeballs on a plate.

The lyrics refer to the “priest stiff in hate” and “women dressed as men for the pleasure of that priest.” The song concludes with, “They can work with Satan while they dress with the saints.” In short, the video reflects the artist—it is a mess.

Bill Donohue commented on Bowie’s latest effort: “The switch-hitting, bisexual, senior citizen from London has resurfaced, this time playing a Jesus-like character who hangs out in a nightclub dump frequented by priests, cardinals and half-naked women.”

Bowie is confused about religion. He once made a public confession: “I was young, fancy free, and Tibetan Buddhism appealed to me at that time. I thought, ‘There’s salvation.’ It didn’t really work. Then I went through Nietzsche, Satanism, Christianity…pottery, and ended up singing. It’s been a long road.”

Donohue noted that as confused as Bowie is, “it’s a sure bet he can’t stop thinking about the Cadillac of all religions, namely Roman Catholicism. There is hope for him yet.” Donohue’s remarks were picked up by media outlets ranging from Rolling Stone to the Wall Street Journal.

When we learned that California lawmakers were considering whether to strip the Boy Scouts of America of their tax-exempt status in the state, Bill Donohue decided that he wanted to play this tax game as well.

Here is an excerpt from his letter to Sacramento legislators:

I understand that California lawmakers are weighing a decision to rescind the tax-exempt status of the Boy Scouts of America; at issue is whether it is a discriminatory organization. While you are considering this issue, I would like you to also determine whether a San Francisco-based group, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, should lose its tax-exempt status.

The Sisters are an anti-Catholic group of homosexuals who dress as nuns and mock every conceivable Catholic belief and practice. When Pope John Paul II visited San Francisco in 1987, the Sisters held an “exorcism” and a Condom Savior Mass; at the latter event, they featured “the Latex Host” and referred to “the Condom Savior.” Perversely, it was in 1987 that the Sisters were granted a tax-exempt status.

We have collected reams of information on the Sisters, and all of it demonstrates how this group not only mocks Catholicism, it also shows how it mocks the very reason why a tax-exempt status is awarded in the first place (serving the public interest).

So in your deliberations on the Boy Scouts, please consider the tax-exempt status of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

We’ll keep you informed.

It didn’t take long before the world embraced Pope Francis. The election of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio to be the new leader of 1.2 billion Catholics was greeted with applause around the globe, but nowhere was it more apparent than in Latin America.

Ten days before the election, Bill Donohue was quoted in the Los Angeles Times expressing what he would like to see in the new pope. “If the new pope embodies the attributes of humility and courage, he will likely succeed,” Donohue said. Pope Francis certainly fits the bill. Indeed, his humbleness instantly proved to be irresistible, and not just within Catholic circles.

Rev. Mark S. Hanson, presiding bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, said he is “encouraged that Pope Francis has worked with Lutherans in Argentina,” and praised him for his “humility and solidarity with those who live on the margins of society.” Gary Bauer, a key evangelical leader, congratulated Pope Francis saying, evangelicals “have a stake in who is elected pope, because without a strong pope, evangelicals will lose their best allies in the most important cultural and political battles of our age.”

Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference said the cardinals who voted for Bergoglio proved their “courageous, bold and catalytic determination.” Nihad Awad, director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, pledged “the Muslim community’s support and cooperation.”

The reaction from most Jewish leaders was ecstatic. Abraham Foxman of the ADL praised the leadership of Pope Francis, especially for his outreach to Jews in Argentina. Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee said the pope was a “warm and sweet and honest man” who often expressed his “solidarity with the Jewish community.” The president of the World Jewish Congress, Ronald Lauder, said the pope was “no stranger to us,” noting his “open-mindedness.” Rabbi Joseph Potasnik of the New York Board of Rabbis lauded the pope for his “history of outstanding relationships with the Jewish people.”

Pope Francis has rightly received kudos for his dedication to the poor. Perhaps less well known is his rejection of liberation theology, a Marxist-infused ideology that claims solidarity with the needy, but in reality is more interested in fomenting class warfare. In other words, he sees through those who want to hijack Catholicism to serve a political agenda.

The Catholic League will run a tribute to Pope Francis on April 15; it will appear on the op-ed page of the New York Times.

Thomas Monaghan, a member of the advisory board of the Catholic League, prevailed in federal district court against the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate. On March 14, Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff of the Eastern District of Michigan granted a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction against enforcement of the HHS mandate.

Monaghan and his property management company, Domino’s Farms Corporation, is being represented by the Thomas More Law Center (Monaghan sold Domino’s Pizza in 1998; Domino’s Farms is a separate entity).

The Obama administration’s lawyers contended that once a business owner chooses to enter into the marketplace, he no longer is entitled to exercise his religious rights. But Judge Zatkoff disagreed, saying, “It is in the best interest of the public that Monaghan not be compelled to act in conflict with his religious beliefs.”

The attorney for the Thomas More Law Center, Erin Mersino, nailed it just right: “The HHS Mandate forces our clients to provide abortion causing drugs to their employees when doing so is a direct violation of the teachings of the Catholic Church and our clients’ sincerely held religious beliefs. The Court’s decision today upholds everyone’s freedom of religion and rights protected by the Constitution.”

There will no doubt be an appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court, and eventually all of these matters are bound to wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court. It is encouraging, however, that Tom Monaghan and his able lawyers won this round.

The news of February 11 that Pope Benedict XVI was resigning hit everyone by surprise. Many were shocked, and with good reason: we live in a world of self-absorbed, ego-driven public figures, thus making the Holy Father’s decision seemingly incomprehensible.

Pope Benedict’s legacy is secure. His encyclicals showed not only his brilliance, they demonstrated his ability to speak convincingly from the heart. His reach was enormous, touching everyone from intellectuals to young people. Though his critics called him the “rottweiler,” most came to love him for who he was.

On the central issues of our day, no one rivaled Pope Benedict XVI. Religion, he emphasized, was as much a public issue as it was a private one. In 2008, he warned American bishops against “the subtle influence of secularism,” holding that “any tendency to treat religion as a private matter must be resisted.” Similarly, he made it clear that religious freedom was not only a God-given right, it was “the path to peace.”

The pope knew religion could be abused, even leading to violence. His much misunderstood 2006 Regensburg University lecture was really about the uncoupling of religion from reason (reason not united to faith also leads to violence).

No one did more to successfully address the problem of priestly sexual abuse than Joseph Ratzinger. Just weeks before he was chosen to be the new pope, he spoke bluntly about this issue: “How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him!” His actions made good on his words.

The pope’s many references to what he called “the dictatorship of relativism” was a reminder that one of the greatest threats to freedom today is the abandonment of the search for truth.

In the wake of this news there has been an explosion of unsolicited advice; it will be ongoing for some time. Paradoxically, most of it is coming from those who are not exactly connected to the Church: we are hearing from ex-Catholics, those with one foot out the door, and non-Catholics. Much of their advice has to do with sex, proving once again that it is not the Church that is obsessed with sex—it is the Church’s critics.

Everyone is entitled to offer advice. But those who are no longer practicing Catholics, or who never were, cannot expect a serious hearing. Indeed, the hubris these people manifest is absolutely astounding.

In the coming months, look for the binge of voyeurism, as well as meddling, to continue. Trust us, we will be there to provide a cogent riposte.

Revised Health and Human Services (HHS) rules were released on February 1.

In two separate statements, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and its president, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, made plain their interest in pursuing the ongoing conversation with Obama administration officials on the HHS mandate. Their goal, as expressed by Cardinal Dolan, is to reach “an acceptable solution” to this issue.

The Catholic hierarchy wants to broaden the understanding of what constitutes a religious ministry. Cardinal Dolan also addressed funding for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception, saying “there remains the possibility that ministries may yet be forced to fund and facilitate such morally illicit activities.” The third issue of concern is the right of those who own a business in the private-sector not to fund such activities.

The best of all possible worlds would be for the Obama administration to roll back its mandate, effectively granting the status quo ante. But that seems unlikely. This is not a settled issue, and the door is open for our side to secure the kinds of religious liberty protections we need. However, because serious discussions are under way, we don’t need our side blasting the administration at this juncture. Unfortunately, some groups have done just that.

From the beginning, the Catholic League has been critical of the HHS mandate while being supportive of the delicate negotiations. It is not always an easy walk, but it is absolutely essential

This is the year that the final showdown will take place between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Catholic institutions. As 2012 came to a close, the judiciary was still sending mixed messages.

At the end of November, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Fourth Circuit of Appeals to rule on the religious-liberty issues of ObamaCare that are being contested by Liberty University. Previously, the circuit court ruled that a challenge was premature, but the high court vacated that decision.

In early December, a U.S. District Court ruled that the Archdiocese of New York could proceed with its lawsuit against the HHS mandate. District Judge Brian Cogan said the federal government’s pledge that it would not burden the Archdiocese once ObamaCare kicks in was not satisfactory. As he neatly put it, “There is no ‘Trust us, changes are coming’ clause in the Constitution.”

In mid-December, the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia heard arguments on the propriety of allowing a lawsuit by Wheaton and Belmont Abbey, two religious colleges, to go forward even though the HHS rules have not been finalized. A ruling will soon be made whether to proceed now or wait.

The confusion will come to an end no later than August; that is when the final HHS rules will be released. In the meantime, Catholic League advisory board member Tom Monaghan (founder of Domino’s Pizza) has also decided to challenge the legality of the HHS mandate.

Left-wing Catholics were exuberant with the election results, but their eudemonia proved fleeting: the very next week the bishops met in Baltimore where they reaffirmed their commitment to the civil rights of the unborn, the defense of marriage, and the cause of religious liberty. The Catholic League was delighted with the hierarchy’s statements.

Thus those Catholics who reject the Church’s teachings on abortion and marriage, and who support the anti-Catholic mandate being imposed by Health and Human Services (HHS), lost big time when the United States  Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) assembled for their biannual meeting. Moreover, the bishops shot down a vaguely worded document on the poor; it was not distributed to them until they arrived at the meeting.

Everyone knew the bishops would not drop their guard on issues like abortion and marriage, but given all the flack they’ve received over fighting the HHS mandate, the outcome was less certain. Timothy Cardinal Dolan, the president of the USCCB, minced no words in his continued support for religious liberty.

Critics of the bishops went bonkers. It is important for the practicing-Catholic community—the only subset that really counts—to understand that there are any number of front groups out there who deceitfully use the Catholic label to advance their agenda. Three such entities that  condemned the bishops are Catholics for Choice, Catholics United, and Faithful America.

Catholics for Choice is the oldest of the anti-Catholic front groups—it is a creature of the Ford Foundation and has no members—and it told the bishops that they need to “realize the error of their ways.” Two other groups lectured the bishops to “refocus their attention on caring for the poor and vulnerable” (by which they mean pushing for more welfare): Catholics United and Faithful America; the former was founded with seed money from atheist billionaire George Soros, and the latter is an online hybrid of another Soros-funded front group, Faith in Public Life.

Remember all those Catholic left-wingers who for years were singing the refrain about the need to achieve common ground? Some of us never believed them, and now at least one of them has admitted that this was a ploy all along. “It is said after every election that the victors should put politics aside and work for the good of the country,” wrote E.J. Dionne. Then he unloaded: “If President Obama believed this pious nonsense, he would put his second term in jeopardy.” Nice to know he does not want the president to “work for the good of the country.”