Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the response to the New York Times ad that ran on Monday:

 

The response to our ad, “Straight Talk About the Catholic Church,” has been so overwhelming that we are running it again this Sunday in the Chicago Tribune. We’ve heard from bishops, priests and religious, as well as lay people, and they are very happy about our statement. 

 

The letters of support, as well as the donations and surprise gifts, are very much appreciated. That is why we are delighted to bring our message to the Chicago area.

 

Dr. Steve Taylor, a Louisiana psychiatrist who has worked with the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP), has been sentenced to two years in prison for possession of child pornography. 

 

The news drew the following response from Catholic League president Bill Donohue:

 

How many more morally debased psychiatrists are working with SNAP? Did SNAP leaders know about the leisure-time activities of Dr. Taylor? When did they know and what did they do about it? It’s time we learned the truth. What we know already is nauseating.

 

In 2008, Dr. Taylor’s computer was seized by the authorities after they learned that he was downloading child pornography. He was jailed on 107 counts at the time, and in September of last year a grand jury indicted him. The court accepted a plea bargain from him this week.

 

Dr. Taylor got off easy, at least according to his own standards. In 2003, speaking for SNAP clients, he argued that the confidentiality of the confessional seal should not be respected by the law. In a contemptuous statement against the Catholic Church, he voiced his objections to a unanimous decision by the Louisiana House Committee on the Administration of Criminal Justice protecting the confidential communication of priests, ministers, rabbis and other clergy members. He said at the time that the seal has to be broken because “We have faces now.”

 

Well, SNAP, we now have the faces of the children your colleague downloaded to feed his sick habits. If breaking the priest-penitent privilege is something you support, will you now support turning over the patient records of Dr. Taylor? Will you support a probe of this matter? What if there is more evidence against him? What if there are more victims? You’re always looking for new victims, aren’t you? Strike when the iron is hot—who cares about psychiatrist-patient privilege? 

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an article that appears today on the front page of the “Style” section of the New York Times:

 

What’s wrong with masturbating in front of a woman reporter? What’s wrong with walking around the workplace in your underpants? What’s wrong with charges of sexual molestation being brought by nine women employees in the past six years, five of whom pressed charges last month? What’s wrong with an employer found guilty of sexually harassing women subordinates “as a class”? What’s wrong with a CEO using his position of power to beckon female employees to have sex with him against their will? Nothing really. To some, he’s a “hero.” The worst that can be said about him is that he is a “morally challenged provocateur” or “an enthusiastic lothario.” Meet Dov Charney, the founder and CEO of American Apparel. And what does Dov think of himself as? Duddy Kravitz, a fictional character described as an “ambitious Jew.”

 

It is so nice to know that the same New York Times that hyperventilates over a priest accused of grabbing a teenager’s behind while wrestling is capable of putting a positive spin on an accused serial molester. Maybe that’s because Charney’s reputation includes his “crusading for workers’ rights”? However, this reputation is wholly without merit: two years ago, he had to let go of 1,800 workers in an immigration sweep. Sounds very much like operating a sweatshop for minorities. 

 

Why are there no “morally challenged provocateur” priests? Why are there no “enthusiastic lothario” priests? Isn’t there at least an “unenthusiastic” one out there somewhere? In any event, those who have an unqualified problem with sexual misconduct need to be informed that they are in violation of the New York Times’ 2011 Book of Ethics. Status counts—not behavior. 

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addresses the lawsuit brought by attorney Jeffrey Anderson against the Vatican:

 

Jeffrey Anderson has tried several times to sue the Vatican over alleged abuse cases that date back decades. He has never won. Nor will he win this time. That’s because his charges are bogus.

 

Anderson accuses Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now the pope, of knowing about the conduct of a Wisconsin priest, Rev. Lawrence Murphy, who allegedly abused Anderson’s client in 1960. The lawsuit, filed last year, was procedurally defective and therefore went nowhere. Now the proper channels have been pursued, but the end result will be the same.

 

The fact is that the Vatican was never notified of Murphy’s behavior, which involved many boys extending back to the 1950s, until 1996. The Vatican could have ignored the case, maintaining that the statute of limitations had expired, but instead ordered a trial. The judge in the trial, Father Thomas Brundage, has already testified that Ratzinger’s name never came up during the proceedings. The trial was called off once it became clear that Murphy was near death; he died soon after. 

Anderson knows he will lose again, but losing is no deterrent to his ambitions. His goal is to keep this issue alive. Obviously, his dream is to take down the pope. 

The man who is being treated as a hero in this case is, in fact, no hero at all. It is being widely reported that the Vatican was notified about Murphy in 1996 by the former Archbishop of Milwaukee, Rembert Weakland. What is not being reported is that Weakland, who left the archdiocese in a homosexual and financial scandal, knew about Murphy’s behavior long before the mid-1990s. There is evidence, in the form of a letter written by the Coadjutor Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin, Raphael M. Fliss, to the Vicar for Personnel, Rev. Joseph A. Janicki, saying he had discussed Murphy’s record of abuse with Weakland. The letter was dated July 9, 1980. But Anderson will hear none of it—he’s out to get the pope.

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on how some are reacting to the clergy abuse report issued yesterday by the bishops:

 

“New Sex Abuse Allegations Down Slightly in 2010” was the main headline in the Catholic News Service (CNS) story, but the National Catholic Reporter wasn’t happy with this positive connotation. Ergo, it ran the CNS story under the banner, “505 Sex Abuse Allegations in 2010.” (Almost all of these accusations extend back decades and have no bearing to what is going on today.)

 

Reuters reported that “there were 428 new allegations of sexual abuse against a minor in 2010, seven of which related to child abuse that was said to occur during the year.” This is misleading. The 428 figure is for dioceses and eparchies alone; when religious institutes are counted, the number jumps to 505. The number of seven refers to the total number of credible accusations made of incidents alleged to have happened in 2010.

 

AFP, the global news agency, reported that “Allegations of sexual abuse involving the Roman Catholic clergy in the United States rose sharply last year to nearly 700 from around 400 in 2009.” First of all, while there were 653 allegations, the number deemed credible was 505. AFP offers the unsubstantiated number and then nicely rounds it up from 653 to 700. It is also wrong to report that “only eight were deemed credible.” The correct figure is seven. The number eight represents the disaggregated number reported by dioceses and eparchies, but does not factor in religious institutes. How can this be? “None of the new allegations reported by religious institutes in 2010 involved children under the age of eighteen in 2010,” the report said. When weighted and averaged, the correct number is seven.

 

Huffington Post takes the cake for getting it wrong. It runs the news story by the Religion News Service (RNS) but instead of using the RNS headline, “Catholic Bishops Report Seven Abuse Cases During 2010,” it manages to spin it with, “Catholic Bishops Report Increase in Abuse Accusations.” This is also wrong: the number of credible accusations declined.

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the 2010 Annual Report on clergy sexual abuse; it was released by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops today:

 

In 2009, there were six credible accusations made against over 40,000 priests during that year; in 2010, the number was seven. Moreover, between 2005 and 2010, the average is 8.3 a year. 

 

As usual, most of the accused are homosexuals: 83 percent of the alleged victims were male, and three-in-four were postpubescent. This is consistent with what we have known for years. In other words, it is a lie to say the Catholic Church has suffered from a pedophilia problem. Those who say that this number reflects the greater access priests have had to altar boys are wrong: the more priests have access to girl altar servers, the more likely they are to choose males (there has been a slight uptick in male victims over the past decade).

 

As usual, the cases date back decades: two-thirds occurred between 1960 and 1984, and three-in-four of the offenders are now dead or have been laicized. The most common time period for new allegations made in 2010 was 1970-1974. That this was when the sexual revolution was at its height is no coincidence. Nor is it a coincidence that the discovery of AIDS in 1981 effectively ended the sexual revolution—not a change in mores. 

 

While this is good news, it is still disconcerting to see hundreds of alleged victims coming forth every year—with their lawyers in tow—expecting that their allegations of what happened many decades ago can somehow be substantiated. Just as distressing is the tendency to call the cops over such matters as “kissing girls on the top of the head,” etc. 

 

We are happy to note that the release of the eighth annual report coincides with our full-page ad in today’s New York Times on this subject. 

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the “wrongful death” suit filed against the Archdiocese of Philadelphia:

 

In 1980, Daniel Neill complained that Rev. Joseph J. Gallagher fondled him when he was an altar boy at St. Mark’s in Bristol, PA. His accusation was not deemed credible by the principal of the school, and so the case was dismissed. Moreover, the boy’s parents did not sue the school. 

 

Fast forward to 2007. Neill, knowing that a grand jury had been impaneled to look into old cases, decides to report his alleged abuse to the Philadelphia Archdiocese. Not surprisingly, the investigators cannot substantiate an uncorroborated accusation of an alleged act of abuse that occurred 27 years earlier, and so they dismiss the case. In July 2008, Neill is notified of the decision, and a year later, in June 2009, he kills himself. End of story? Not quite. Yesterday, Neill’s family sued the archdiocese, blaming it for the suicide.

 

Neill’s family is represented by the most anti-Catholic lawyer in the nation, Jeffrey Anderson. He is leaning on the recent grand jury report, perhaps the most specious in modern times. It held that the investigators should have deemed Neill’s claims credible, but offered no evidence to support its position. Indeed, it either distorted the truth, or it lied.

 

Here are the facts. The grand jury report (“Ben” is Neill’s pseudonym) says that Neill’s account was based on “the corroboration of other witnesses.” Wrong. There was no corroboration by anyone. While the report says there were a few altar boys who said that they, like Neill, had discussed masturbation in the confessional, “none of them said they were molested by Father Gallagher.” More important, the report never says that even one of these friends was witness to—or even heard about—the alleged abuse. And indeed the only person Neill said he discussed his travails with at the time was the priest’s sister. Why he chose only her is not known, but what is known is that she was retarded!

 

What is really outlandish is the way the media continue to give high profile to these gold-digging lawyers and their newly discovered “victims.”

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the reaction he has gotten from some New Hampshire Republicans in the wake of the Catholic League protest of Rep. David Bettencourt’s attack on Bishop McCormack:

 

Never in the nearly 18 years I have spent as president of the Catholic League have I seen more totally irresponsible statements issued by the lawmakers in any one state. While some Republicans—and all of those attacking the Catholic League are Republicans—are merely upset with our criticism of Rep. Bettencourt, two have clearly crossed the line. 

 

Rep. Lynne Ober wrote the following to us in an e-mail: “I agree that it is certainly unfortunate that the Catholic League chooses to harbor a person who helped pedophiles continue abusing children.”

 

Rep. Andrew Manuse wrote this missive: “I am now considering a bill to remove the Church’s tax exempt status in New Hampshire, for you have clearly shown that you no longer want it.”

 

I have a challenge for the two of them. 

 

Why doesn’t Ober take the next step by personally accusing me of harboring a person who helped pedophiles continue to abuse children? Organizations can’t sue for libel, but individuals can.  

 

Why doesn’t Manuse go right ahead with his bill to remove the Church’s tax-exempt status? We’d love to present his e-mail in court.

 

Didn’t anyone ever tell these lawmakers to be careful what they put in writing? In any event, it’s time these two heard from our members.

 

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on news reports indicating that New Hampshire House Majority Leader David J. Bettencourt plans to apologize to Manchester Bishop John B. McCormack for calling him a “pedophile pimp”:

 

The apology is overdue. We can only hope it is sincere and to the point, quite unlike the lame letter Bettencourt wrote to the bishop. 

 

To lower the bar on the kind of discourse expected of public servants, at any level of government, would be a grave mistake. Kids who can’t vote listen to the news, and if lawmakers can savage religious leaders, the lesson learned is that coarse language—in any setting—can be uttered with impunity. It is up to the people of New Hampshire to determine whether the apology is satisfactory. The Catholic League has no further comment on this issue.