The following is an excerpt from the “SNAP Exposed” report; the complete report on the July 8-10 conference in D.C. is available online at catholicleague.org.

There were approximately 110-130 people in attendance. All  were white and approximately 60% were female (one male wore a Voice of the Faithful T-shirt). The ages ranged from about 40-75; the majority were 55-65.

The recurring theme of the conference was the evil nature of the Catholic Church. The word “evil” was used repeatedly to describe “the institution.” There was no presumption of innocence: accused priests were spoken of as if they were guilty, and this was true of all the participants, including the attorneys.

William Spade, who was an Assistant District Attorney in the Philadelphia D.A.’s Office from 1995-2004, gave an overview of his work in that office. His relationship with Catholicism is eclectic. “I don’t like the institution,” he allows, “but I like the faith.”

When Spade was in the D.A.’s office, the man he wanted to get more than anyone else was Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, the former Archbishop of Philadelphia (they always go after the top cleric). To Spade’s chagrin, he noted that Bevilacqua was able to escape again and again. He did not say why he always failed. After striking pay dirt, Spade went into private practice. What he drew from his experience, he told the audience, was that the best way to prosecute the Catholic Church was at the federal level.

When it comes to attorneys who have made a career out of suing the Catholic Church, Jeffrey Anderson has no equal. The Minnesota lawyer was raised as a Lutheran. But that didn’t work out so he became a Catholic. Then he became an atheist. Not just an ordinary one—he became a self-described “dedicated atheist.” Then he had another conversion: last year he described himself as “deeply religious.” His religious convictions, however, proved not to be too deep, which is why he is now touted as an “agnostic.”

Anderson led a legal panel at the conference that included Church-suing lawyers Jeffrey Herman and Mitchell Garabedian. Virtually the entire session was devoted to discussing the legal impediments to suing the Church. The biggest problem, they said, was the way the statute of limitations differed from state to state. Never once was it even hinted at that these statutes were written to protect the constitutional rights of the accused. Without due process, civil liberties are a sham. No matter, Anderson said he wants to see this happen globally, making it easier to sue the Catholic Church around the world.

When Anderson said that the lawsuits are not about the money, he was speaking honestly. To be sure, money is a major motivator for his clients. But greed is not what fires him. No, what inspires him, and those of his ilk, is something deeper, something money can’t buy. Hatred. That’s the only way to understand why Anderson continues to file suit after suit against the Vatican—nothing would make him happier than to bring down the pope. Even though Anderson continues to lose, the outside chance that he might get the pope is enough to get his juices going.

Garabedian, a Boston attorney, isn’t interested in balancing the scales of justice: he wants to go for the kill. “This immoral entity, the Catholic Church, should be defeated. We must stand up and defeat this evil.” That’s exactly what he told the true believers. Candid statements like this give the lie to the argument that those who routinely bring suits against the Church are doing so out of fidelity to the law.

Richard Sipe, Tom Doyle and Marianne Benkert presented the most inflammatory address of them all. Indeed, it was so bad that the anger was described as “off-the-charts.” Here is another description of what transpired: “Each presenter in this session exhibited a very high level of hatred and anger towards the Church. They exhibited a visceral, deep-seated hatred of the Church.” The persons who offered this commentary, it should be noted, are not given to hyperbole, making their report all the more disturbing.

Sipe is a former Benedictine monk who has been ripping the Church for years. He bluntly told the crowd, “The Church is corrupt.” Worse, he opined, “Abuse is only the tip of the iceberg.” He did not allude to what was next.

Benkert, a psychiatrist, maintained there are many ways in which the Church manifests narcissism, the alleged cause of sexual abuse. Among them, she said, are the following: the Church refuses to acknowledge sin; it engages in scapegoating; it sacrifices others; it is a master of disguise and pretense; it fosters intellectual deviousness; it lies; it forces the faithful to submit their will to the Church; it is controlling; it causes “religious duress”; etc. She stressed that the narcissist is the personification of evil. “It can be evil in a person or in an institution,” suggesting we are dealing either with evil priests or the evil Catholic Church. Finally, she told the gathering, “Sue the Church because they understand money; they are not empathetic.”

It was sad to learn that the worst anti-Catholic rant of the day was delivered by Thomas Doyle, an ordained Dominican priest. The recovering alcoholic has butted heads with bishops before, and after one such confrontation he was removed from a military chaplain post. He also likes to blame Pope John Paul II for the abuse scandal. At the conference, Doyle spewed out every anti-Catholic canard possible. Here are a few examples:

• The Church was established by Constantine—not Jesus Christ.

• The Church = fear, power, and guilt.

• The Church is inauthentic and there is a “toxic religiosity” in this institution. The toxicity keeps people subjugated.

• There needs to be a radical restructuring of the priesthood.

• The Mass = magic words. People are compelled to sprinkle water on the forehead of babies (he snidely said) or they will go to minimum security Hell if they die.

• He referred to priestly vestments as “dresses.”

One of the most revealing aspects of the conference occurred when Anderson shamelessly conducted a fundraising appeal on the spot, matching dollar for dollar any donation made by an attendee. But even the multimillionaire has limits: he made it clear that he wouldn’t match a $10,000 donation made by fellow attorney, Jeffrey Herman. An appeal was also made to become “a sustaining member of SNAP for $25 per month”; everyone was encouraged to sign up with a credit card right then and there.

[Note: A few weeks after the conference ended, attendees were provided with a summary of its highlights. The fundraising appeal was described as an “amazing event,” so much so that it was touted as “an emotionally charged moment.” The final tally: “The people in the room set a record for fundraising at the conference by contributing over $30,000.”

Let’s do the math. If Herman gave $10,000, and Anderson pledged to match all donations save for Herman’s contribution, that means the attendees dished out $10,000. In other words, two steeple-chasing attorneys accounted for two-thirds of all the money raised. Absent their input, SNAP folds. Not exactly the face of a grass roots movement.]

Author Jason Berry discussed “Human Rights Movements in the Church.” He also spoke about his new book, Render Unto Rome: The Secret Life of Money in the Catholic Church, and his documentary, “Vows of Silence.” According to Berry, the “face of corruption in the Catholic Church is Cardinal Angelo Sodano.” It was Sodano’s handling of the Father Marcial Maciel Degollado case that prompted the accusation. Berry also charged that the Church uses “property and money to blunt the force of justice,” and asked attendees to write letters demanding that Cardinal Sodano be removed from office.

As it turns out, Berry is the one who has little interest in justice. For example, in Render Unto Rome he says that Father Maciel “cultivated powerful conservatives.” He lists me as one of them. But I never met, corresponded with, or in any way had anything to do with, the disgraced priest. Nor did I ever defend him. Berry knows all of this because I’ve corrected him before, putting forth the evidence. Yet he persists in lying.

BishopAccountability founder and president, Terry McKiernan, showed what he is made of when he boasted, “I hope we can find ways of sticking it to this man.” The man he wants to “stick it to” is none other than the head of the New York Archdiocese, and the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Archbishop Timothy Dolan.

McKiernan went on a rant against the New York Archbishop. Dolan was accused of being a “doctrinal enforcer” who “only cares about climbing the ladder.” Without a shred of evidence, he said that Dolan is “keeping the lid on 55 names” of predator priests in his archdiocese. It must be a pretty tight lid: not a single person in the entire country has ever made such a scurrilous accusation. It’s time to either put up or shut up.

David Clohessy, the executive director of SNAP, took the time to share some of the ways he manipulates the media. For example, attendees were instructed that to get media attention, it is best to hold press conferences outside a chancery or a police station. If it’s held outside the chancery, it makes it easy for the media because they only have to go to one location. After you are interviewed as a SNAP representative (they evidently have lots of deputies), he said, reporters will go inside to interview the diocesan PR person.

Talk, however, is not sufficient. Here are more of their schemes:

• “Display holy childhood photos!” Attorneys should conduct an interview in front of the parish where the priest was assigned (on public property). Why? Because then you will get clients and you’ll also have whistleblowers call you after they see the interview on TV.

• Use “feeling words” in interviews: “I was scared. I was suicidal.” Be sad and not mad. The goal is to make an emotional connection with the audience. If you don’t have compelling holy childhood photos, we can provide you with photos of other kids that can be held up for the cameras.

• Use the word “kids” as often as possible when being interviewed.

It is not certain whether the media, which generally give a sympathetic hearing to SNAP, care how orchestrated these events are. But Catholics should care. After all, what is at stake is an attempt to manipulate public opinion, rallying Americans against the Catholic Church. Staging sadness is not only phony, it is unethical.

SNAP and its allies have long pulled the wool over the eyes of many in the media—it’s time we all looked under the mask.

For many years, the plight of alleged victims of priestly sexual abuse have had as their unofficial spokesperson a group called the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, more commonly known as SNAP. The Catholic League has had good reasons to question their motives, and now we have convincing evidence proving we were right all along.

At a recent SNAP conference in Washington, D.C., reliable friends of the Catholic League attended the event. What they heard and saw was a well-coordinated attack on the Catholic Church, led by SNAP leaders and others. The entire report is available online at catholicleague.org; an excerpt appears on pp. 8-9.

Joining SNAP were some high profile lawyers who have made a killing off of their lawsuits against the Church. Also in attendance was BishopAccountability, which proved to be much more than just a website that tallies cases of alleged abuse. Church-bashing authors and agenda-driven psychiatrists also spoke at the event.

What emerged from the conference was a picture of so-called victims’ advocates that contrasts sharply with their innocent media image. They are activists—men and women fueled more by a vendetta against the Church than any alleged concern for victims. Some of the remarks were not only boilerplate, they were totally inexcusable and reprehensible.

When the Catholic Church is constantly referred to as the “evil institution,” and all accused priests are assumed guilty, something is seriously wrong. Similarly, when vile accusations are made against some bishops, and are never challenged by a single person at the conference, we are not talking about aggrieved individuals trying to do right by the Church. No, we are talking about hatred and injustice.

We know there are many Catholic dissident organizations which harbor resentment against the Church, but they are generally known to the public as unhappy campers who have not gotten their way. Not so with SNAP and its allies: they are the darlings of the media, and are seen as motivated by compassion and the quest for reconciliation. Our findings prove otherwise.

Bill Donohue’s report, which is based on information given to him by those at the conference, was sent to all the bishops, as well as to scores of other friendly sources; many in the media were also sent a copy. It is our hope that from now on, they will take with a grain of salt what the victims’ lobby has to say about bishops and priests. We need to know who our real enemies are.

Catholic League president William Donohue commented today on the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) new Senior Advisor for Religious Outreach, Rev. Brenda Bartella Peterson:

“We know that Rev. Peterson wants ‘under God’ thrown out of the Pledge, and that she believes ‘Love Thy Neighbor’ means paying taxes. Now we will show the positions of the Clergy Leadership Network (CLN), the organization she recently left as its executive director.

“In the CLN’s ‘Debate’ section of its website, it says a lot about separation of church and state, but virtually nothing about religious liberty (e.g., it is against faith-based initiatives). Regarding tax policies, it would be an understatement to say it likes taxes: ‘Taxes provide a way to look out for our neighbors….Slashing taxes denies that!’ It then says that slashing taxes is ‘inevitably an appeal to our greed, not to our generosity or compassion.’ In other words, the greedy want to keep the money they’ve earned; those who want to take it from us are the altruists. No wonder Rev. Peterson says, ‘The federal budget is a moral document.’

“Under the ‘Current Issues’ section, there are three issues listed: stem cell research, global security and the federal marriage amendment. It has something to say about the first two issues, but, inexplicably, the third issue cannot be accessed. This is deceitful. Consider that the CLN’s CEO, Albert Pennybacker, is on record favoring gay marriage. And another senior official, William Sloane Coffin, has said that most of the other CLN officials ‘view marriage as a human right, not a reward for being heterosexual.’ The ‘Focus Statement’ of the CLN website even says that ‘gay, lesbian, bisexual [and] transsexual people are being attacked through legislation and even constitutional amendments.’ It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what Rev. Peterson believes.

• “The website even provides a link to an anti-Catholic site, Chuck Currie (see his piece, ‘When Catholic Girls Go Wild’). To top it off, there is a link to MoveOn.org, a smear site that has nothing to do with religion. Remember, Rev. Peterson presided over it all, and for this she was rewarded by the DNC as its number-one liaison to religious groups.”

The April 28 edition of the Long Island daily, Newsday, ran an article about critics of Monsignor John Alesandro, pastor of St. Dominic’s in Oyster Bay. Some parishioners have lost confidence in his ability to lead the parish, while others have rallied to his side. It wasn’t the story about the parish that bothered us, it was Newsday‘s decision to run a poll on its website asking the public whether Msgr. Alesandro should be removed as pastor. We decided to give the newspaper some of its own medicine.

We asked the public to go to our website at catholicleague.org and cast a vote on the question, “Is Newsday anti-Catholic?” Our poll, like Newsday‘s, was open to everyone. We figured that since Newsday had broken ranks with virtually every newspaper in the United States by inviting non-Catholics to stick their noses into the internal affairs of the Catholic Church, we thought it only proper to ask people from Maine to California what they thought of Newsday‘s foray into journalistic voyeurism.

When users clicked on our website, they were drawn to our special report on Newsday‘s anti-Catholic columnists. It is a useful guide that details the nature and extent of the newspaper’s hostility to Catholicism.

Outside of Long Island, it is not widely known that Newsday continues to write about alleged instances of priestly abuse that occurred many decades ago. In a statement to the press, we decided that two can play the same game. “For instance,” we said, “how many people know that Newsday continues to employ a columnist, Jimmy Breslin, who made obscene and racist remarks to a Korean-American woman reporter in 1990 in front of other staffers; she was guilty of criticizing him for one of his columns. Breslin, according to a friend, called the woman a ‘yellow cur, slant-eyed and a female body part.'”

And for this Breslin was suspended for two weeks! “In short,” we said, “becauseNewsday doesn’t have the courage to police the obscene bigots in its own newsroom, it has no moral standing to invite the public to question the internal affairs of the Catholic Church.”

In our latest annual report, we dubbed Newsday the most anti-Catholic newspaper in the nation. This is just one more example of how sick this newspaper is.

Catholic League members will be happy to know that we got hold of a media reference guide and obtained the e-mail addresses of the entire Newsday staff. We then bombarded the entire company with our news release. Everyone from sports writers to food critics got our statement. And it looks like it worked. By early afternoon the poll was taken off its home page and moved to the Long Island section, and by mid-afternoon it was removed altogether. The newspaper never did print the final tally.
We let our poll stay up for a few days. The final result? To the question, “Is Newsday anti-Catholic?”, 95 percent said “yes”; 4 percent said “no”; and 1 percent were unsure. There were 1158 votes cast, and 1101 of them got it right.

The Dan Brown book, The Da Vinci Code, is a best-selling work of fiction that discusses a real-life Catholic organization, Opus Dei. To help separate fact from fiction, we asked officials at Opus Dei to write a short article on this subject. Herewith their reply.

Founded in 1928 by St. Josemaría Escrivá, Opus Dei (Latin for “work of God”) has a mission of spreading Christ’s teaching on the universal call to holiness. A personal prelature, it works in dioceses around the world, with the approval of local bishops. Opus Dei has been the subject of several myths, made popular recently by the Da Vinci Code.

Myth: Opus Dei has a political agenda.
Fact: The only thing Opus Dei has to say about politics is what the Church says, and many of the Church’s social teachings leave room for different opinions on concrete political questions. In these opinionable matters, Opus Dei members make their own decisions just like other faithful Catholics. But you won’t understand Opus Dei until you realize that politics—whether civil or ecclesial—just isn’t its institutional focus. Opus Dei’s focus is on providing spiritual guidance to help people deepen their faith and integrate it with their daily life.

Myth: Opus Dei is a secret society.
Fact: The Opus Dei Prelature publishes the names of all its priests and all its international and regional directors. Like dioceses and parishes, it does not publish lay members’ names. Neither do health clubs for that matter, and people surely deserve as much privacy in their spiritual affairs as they do in medical matters. Members, however, are more than happy to tell you of their membership and what Opus Dei is all about.

While we’re at it, we can confirm that the Pope’s spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, is a member, but we would like to dispel once and for all the rumors that Louis Freeh, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Mel Gibson are members.

Myth: Opus Dei brainwashes, coerces, or pressures members and potential members.
Fact: Opus Dei has complete respect for people’s freedom. It’s ludicrous to think that the Pope and bishops worldwide would support an institution that didn’t. In this era of relativism, there are plenty of people who will call teaching the faith, giving spiritual guidance, and being a Christian witness “brainwashing,” “coercion,” and “recruiting” or “proselytism.” Nowadays consenting adults are free of criticism for doing almost anything—anything apparently except trying to help people grow in their faith and practice it in their daily life.

Myth: Opus Dei makes its members practice dangerous corporal mortifications.
Fact: Each Lent, the Church reminds people that sacrifice is part of the spiritual life. To help its members follow this teaching, Opus Dei encourages them to make small sacrifices, such as persevering in their work or listening to those in need. The Catholic tradition also includes other penances, such as fasting and the use of a cilice or discipline, as means for deepening one’s union with Christ. Many saints, including Opus Dei’s founder, St. Josemaría Escrivá, have practiced such penances in a heroic way. Some celibate members of Opus Dei and of other Church institutions freely follow some of these customs, though in a mitigated way. They do so subject to the advice of their spiritual director and in a way that is never harmful to their health, completely unlike theDa Vinci Code‘s distorted representation. These kinds of sacrifices are certainly not a focus in Opus Dei, which emphasizes integrating faith with the activities of everyday life.

Myth: Opus Dei’s status as a “personal prelature” cuts it loose from oversight by the bishops.
Fact: Like a diocese, a personal prelature is overseen by the Holy See. Additionally, Opus Dei receives permission from local bishops before starting apostolic work in their dioceses and keeps diocesan bishops informed about its activities. The guidance it offers its members pertains only to matters connected with its mission, which is educating people about the universal call to holiness and helping them fulfill this call in their daily life. The members of the prelature remain members of their diocese and are subject to their local bishop just like other Catholics.

Myth: With all the criticism, Opus Dei must be doing something wrong.
Fact: Every successful organization has its critics, from Coca-Cola to the Catholic Church itself. As for Opus Dei’s critics, anyone who does not believe in Christ, the Church’s teachings, or loyalty to the Pope could easily have “issues” with Opus Dei, since it accepts all these things. It’s also common that an organization’s critics have personal reasons for misinterpreting things—even with good intentions. What’s more relevant than the criticism is the fact that millions of people around the world know and love Opus Dei, including the Pope and a great number of bishops. This is because Opus Dei gives so much help to ordinary people who want to connect their faith with daily life.

For further information, contact the Opus Dei Information Office at info@opusdei.org or (212) 532-3570.

It is not enough for us to blast the connection between the Democratic National Committee and Catholics for a Free Choice in the pages of the New York Times. Read the ad here and then get as many family members and friends to contact the DNC. Here is how to do it:

Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol Street, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20003

Telephone: 202-863-8000
Fax: 202-863-8174
Email: dnc@democrats.org

The hate mail our ad generated was substantial. That doesn’t bother us—we would be angered if we were ignored. But now is the time for our side to respond. So please contact the DNC today.

In the last edition of Catalyst, we ran an article detailing our objections to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) association with Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC). Directed by Frances Kissling, CFFC is one of the nation’s preeminent anti-Catholic groups.

Over the summer, we contacted every Democrat in the House and Senate asking for their help in breaking this relationship. We are grateful to both Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) and Tim Roemer (D-IN) for their sincere efforts in this regard. But since nothing has changed, we embarked on a major campaign this fall to break the DNC-CFFC relationship. At issue is the DNC’s listing of CFFC on the organizational link page of its website, democrats.org.

We are asking all Catholics to contact the DNC and make known their outrage over the DNC-CFFC link (see page 2 for information). Kissling has said that it is her goal to “overthrow” the Catholic Church. She has also lobbied the U.N. to kick the Holy See out of the world organization. No wonder she has twice been denounced as a fraud by the U.S. bishops. And this is the kind of Catholic that the DNC wants to associate with?

As our members know, our October appeal is directed at raising the funds necessary to pay for ads in several national Catholic newspapers and in prominent Washington publications condemning the DNC for its obstinacy. The first ad ran in the September 15-21 edition of the National Catholic Register. More are on the way in Our Sunday Visitor, the Wanderer and Roll Call (an influential Washington publication).

To think that the DNC would consider anti-Catholics to be representative of its Catholic base is mind-boggling! When columnist Mark Shields first brought this matter to light, we were as astounded as he was. Now the situation has worsened, and that is why we are prepared to spend what we need to conduct an effective campaign.

It is important that all Catholic League members write, call or email the DNC. Contact your congressman as well, especially if he or she is a Democrat. For the record, we do not believe that Democrats would knowingly sanction Catholic bashing. All the more reason to alert them to this invidious association between the DNC and CFFC.

On the home page of the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) website, democrats.org, there is a link to organizations of interest. Until late July, the “Catholic” heading listed only one group, Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC). But when syndicated columnist Mark Shields mentioned this as his “Outrage of the Week” on the CNN show “The Capital Gang,” the DNC added another Catholic source to its “Catholic” listing: catholic-USA.com. We jumped on this “solution” immediately.

On July 31, William Donohue wrote to DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe imploring him to “act quickly and decisively by removing Catholics for a Free Choice from the DNC’s links of interest organizations.” The very fact that this group was the only Catholic listing on its website until recently suggests that the DNC believes its Catholic base is led by Frances Kissling.

That the DNC added a legitimate Catholic website to its listing only complicated things for Mr. McAuliffe: if CFFC were an authentic Catholic group, it would have been named in the umbrella Catholic site, catholic-USA.com (i.e., there are scores of bona-fide Catholic groups posted there, including the Catholic League). Ergo, the DNC knows CFFC is bogus yet continues to provide cover for it.

Our position, as explained to the media, is as follows: “It is flatly wrong to tag CFFC as merely a ‘pro-choice’ group of ex-Catholics. Kissling has openly admitted that it is her goal to ‘overthrow’ the Catholic Church. That is why she works so hard to subvert the Church by attempting to get the Holy See kicked out of the U.N. Twice the U.S. bishops have condemned CFFC as a fraud, yet the DNC amazingly gives legitimacy to this anti-Catholic front group.”

When no response from McAuliffe was forthcoming, and when we were continually stonewalled by DNC operatives, Donohue wrote to every Democrat in the House and Senate asking for assistance. His request? For them to persuade the DNC to drop Catholics for a Free Choice from its website.

On August 6, Donohue issued the following news release to media outlets across the nation:

“The Democrats are playing with fire. As I said in my letter, the Catholic League previously fought then-Governor George W. Bush on his appearance at Bob Jones University and we also fought the Republicans on the House Chaplain issue. I went on the ‘Today’ show to accept Gov. Bush’s apology and, as everyone knows, we prevailed in the House Chaplain controversy by seeing to it that a Catholic priest was finally appointed to the post. Now I am telling the Democrats that ‘I pledge to you that I will do nothing less than fight the DNC just as hard over the listing of Catholics for a Free Choice.’

“There are dozens of abortion-rights organizations in the nation. Because the Catholic League is not a pro-life group, per se (we are certainly pro-life in our convictions), it would not make sense to fight Democrats or Republicans on this subject. But the issue here is anti-Catholicism and that falls smack in the bull’s-eye of the Catholic League’s mission.

“This could be a long Fall for the Democrats if they decide to string this one out. We are prepared to spend considerable resources informing the public of what the DNC considers its Catholic base to be. Mark Shields is right: it is both insensitive and ignorant of the DNC to associate itself with Catholics for a Free Choice.”

This fight is not over. We are prepared to give the DNC free advertisement, making sure that every Catholic knows how fond the Dems are of Frances Kissling.