A female student at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) dressed as the pope while appearing naked from the waist down at the annual art school parade. Her pubic hair was shaved in the shape of a cross; she passed out condoms to the public. Administrators are reviewing this incident to see “if our community standards or laws were violated.”

Bill Donohue raises several questions about what happened:

CMU did not have to ponder what to do about a recent incident involving one of its fraternities: it simply suspended the students, as well as the entire Beta Theta Pi fraternity, for taking sexual pictures and videos inside the frat house and then emailing them to other members; an investigation is pending. But when it comes to a female student who walks the streets naked from the waist down while mocking the pope, the administrators are much more relaxed: she has not been suspended during a probe of this matter.

“The Freedom of Expression Policy” at CMU prizes individual expression, but it is not absolute: it explicitly ties rights to responsibilities. Perhaps most important, the “Carnegie Mellon Code” says students “are expected to meet the highest standards of personal, ethical and moral conduct possible.” It would seem axiomatic that the offending student violated these strictures.

If CMU tolerates this incident, invoking no sanctions whatsoever, then it is opening a door it may regret. What if instead of shaved pubic hair in the shape of a cross, a student chooses to depict a swastika?

CMU’s decision not to suspend this female student, who publicly ridiculed Catholics and violated the local ordinance on public nudity, while invoking sanctions against the frat boys for offensive behavior behind closed doors, is legally problematic and morally indefensible.

Contact Gina Casalegno, dean of students: ginac@andrew.cmu.edu

Bill Donohue comments on reactions to the Boston terrorists:

It is only right that people as diverse as Boston Archbishop Sean O’Malley, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Rep. Keith Ellison call on Americans not to blame all Muslims for the behavior of the two Muslim terrorists who bombed Boston. Others, however, have gone way beyond this call for restraint.

The Wall Street Journal ran a piece yesterday by Michael B. Mukasey titled, “Make No Mistake, It Was Jihad.” His point was well made. Another apt headline, this one from today’s Dallas Morning News, says, “Boston Bombing Suspect Charged; Officials Say Religion Motivated Bombings.”

Despite the evidence, we are told by Religion Dispatches, “Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings.” Akbar Ahmed from American University is confident that “Islam had nothing to do with it.” The New York Times begs us to distinguish between Al Qaeda and “Muslim extremists.” The Atlantic website ran the headline, “The Boston Bombers Were Muslim: So?” The Southern Poverty Law Center ridicules the idea that radical Muslims had anything to do with the bombings, accusing those who draw attention to this of blaming the “bogeyman.”

It’s too bad the aforementioned don’t think of accused priests the way they do accused Muslims; then we may not have as much priest-bashing as we do. It is hard not to notice that the same people who never go to bat for priests—even when they are uniformly condemned as molesters—are now all jacked up about the role Islamism plays in promoting Muslim terrorism. Indeed, they are in complete denial.

Bill Maher, who typically takes cheap shots at priests, is to be commended for taking aim at a guest who tried to equate Islam with Christianity and Judaism. If Maher gets it, why don’t the others?

Bill Donohue comments on the April 19 episode of “The 700 Club”:

In a segment titled “God and Hitler,” Gordon Robertson (son of Rev. Pat Robertson), hosted a discussion on the Catholic Church’s response to Hitler. Several errors of fact were made.

1) It is wrong to paint Hitler as a Catholic. Though he was baptized, he excommunicated himself, latae sententiae, when he sought, in his words, to “crush [the Catholic Church] like a toad.” He made good on his pledge by persecuting 8,000 priests, over 500 of whom were killed in concentration camps. He also sought to assassinate the pope.

2) The 1933 Nazi-Vatican Concordat was not a show of solidarity. As Rabbi David Dalin has shown, it was a protective measure designed to protect German Catholics from persecution. In fact, at least 34 letters of protest were sent from the Vatican to the Nazis between 1933 and 1937, culminating in a 1937 encyclical that condemned Nazi violations of the Concordat and its racial ideology. It was smuggled out of Italy and distributed on Palm Sunday to Catholics in Germany. Nothing like this happened in Protestant churches in Germany.

3) It is not true that Hitler met resistance from Protestants alone. Former Israeli Diplomat Pinchas Lapide estimated that the Catholic Church, under the auspices of Pope Pius XII, saved as many as 860,000 Jewish lives. During the war, the New York Times twice said the Church was “a lonely voice crying out of the silence of a continent”; Albert Einstein also singled out the Church during the war. After the war, Golda Meir praised the work of the Church, as did the ADL, the World Jewish Congress, and scores of other Jewish organizations.

4) It is factually wrong to say the Vatican archives have “never been seen.” Many scholars have had access. As for Pope Pius XII being “Hitler’s Pope,” it should be noted that John Cornwell, the ex-seminarian who originated this term, retracted it years ago. So why does “The 700 Club” continue to cite it?

Bill Donohue comments on The Testament of Mary:

Colm Toibin’s book, The Testament of Mary, is now the subject of a Broadway play; it opens today at the Walter Kerr Theatre. There is no question that Toibin is a gifted writer, but it is not easy to see who is going to be drawn to this play, even if it runs for only 12 weeks. His novella was not written to endear himself to Christians—he posits that Mary does not believe her son was the Son of God—though in fairness there is nothing vicious about his work.

Toibin fancies that Mary is not the pious, obedient woman we have come to know. Instead, she very much had a mind of her own, declaring that her son died in vain. Speaking of the crucifixion, she says, “I fled before it was over but if you want witnesses then I am one and I can tell you now, when you say that he redeemed the world, I will say that it was not worth it. It was not worth it.”

Toibin, who is a homosexual ex-Catholic, is not exactly a champion of the Catholic Church. Indeed, he is a vociferous critic of the Church’s teachings on sexuality. He is entitled to his views, though it must be said that his attempt to persuade Christians of the fallacies of their religion falls flat.

We are proud to promote this new book on Pope Francis. For further information please click here.

Bill Donohue comments on the immigration reform bill that was introduced in Congress today:

No institution, religious or secular, has been more vocal in its insistence that immigration reform is needed than the Catholic Church. The point person for the Church on this issue is Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles; he is chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Migration.

Today, Archbishop Gomez, speaking for the bishops, commended the senators who crafted this bill, expressing his support for “working with Congress to fashion a final bill that respects the basic human rights and dignity of newcomers to our land—migrants, refugees, and other vulnerable populations.”

The Catholic League applauds the work of the so-called “Gang of Eight” senators responsible for the bill, and we especially salute Archbishop Gomez for his steadfast promotion of a just immigration policy.

The bill is appropriately multi-faceted. Enhanced border security, as well as a realistic pathway to citizenship, are at the center of the legislation. Until recently, both Republicans and Democrats have failed miserably in addressing these issues. To wit: some Republicans have thought they can somehow round up every illegal alien and send him back to his home country; some Democrats have thought they can just ignore the cry for greater border security.

Both political parties have, in effect, invited this problem by failing to come to grips with certain realities. Hopefully, we are about to change course, and with the help of the bishops, ably led by Archbishop Gomez, we are confident that progress will be made.

Bill Donohue comments on the latest news regarding the status of Father Greg Shaffer on the campus of George Washington University (GWU):

On Friday, I issued a critical statement on the way GWU was handling the controversy over Father Shaffer. Two homosexual students, neither of whom is Catholic, took umbrage at Father Shaffer for not blessing their relationship; they also objected to his defense of Church teachings on homosexuality and abortion. Seeking revenge, they sought to squash his ministry as Chaplain of the Newman Center. Following our release, an important development occurred.

The provost, Dr. Steven Lerman, defended the free speech rights of Father Shaffer before a meeting of the Faculty Senate; dozens of professors were in attendance. While a formal GWU statement ending this matter has yet to be made, the remarks by the provost are encouraging. Moreover, it was announced that the Student Association has awarded the Newman Center an increase in funding for the next academic year.

We welcome this breakthrough and expect that this issue will soon be concluded in a just manner.

Bill Donohue comments on how George Washington University (GWU) has handled the issue of students seeking to remove Father Greg Shaffer from his post as Chaplain of the Newman Center:

Two students, neither of whom is Catholic (one belongs to some faux Catholic entity and the other is an agnostic Jew), are not only attempting to oust Father Shaffer, they are seeking to effectively neuter the very purpose of the Newman Center, which is to serve Catholics. Their objections to the Church’s teachings on homosexuality and abortion have impelled them to start a campus campaign to censor the Catholic voice on campus.

On April 4, I contacted top administrative officials on campus imploring them to “address this problem justly and without delay.” They have failed to do so. Moreover, they have violated the standards for diversity and inclusion that were set by its president, Steven Knapp. Flagged on the university’s website is his commitment “to make sure we are providing a welcoming and supportive environment for persons of all backgrounds.”  This is patently untrue, Father Greg Shaffer being Exhibit A.

GWU’s statement on this issue says it “strives to embody the spirit of mutual respect and reasoned debate that is essential to our academic mission. We are therefore committed to ensuring that all members of our community are free to express their religious beliefs while honoring the right of others to express theirs.”

This is classic doublespeak. There is only one party to this controversy that has crossed the line, and it isn’t Father Shaffer. The attempt to silence him shows nothing but contempt for diversity and tolerance, the twin towers of academic virtue these days. Those interested in reading a courageous and well-reasoned statement on this issue should see the current editorial in The Catholic Standard, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Washington (click here).

Contact the Chief of Staff, Office of the President: porter@gwu.edu

Nicholas Coppola presented petitions to the Diocese of Rockville Centre today in an effort to be reinstated at St. Anthony’s in Oceanside, New York. He was dismissed after it was learned that he “married” his boyfriend.

Commenting on today’s event is Bill Donohue:

Looks like the media were snookered. Had they shown an ounce of curiosity, they would have asked Coppola to see what was in the three boxes that allegedly contained evidence of those who signed the petition. Two of the boxes were empty; the contents of the other box was so small it could easily have fit into a large envelope.

Nicholas Coppola says he amassed over 18,000 signatures. Considering that he and his homosexual allies intentionally deceived the media, his credibility is shot.

Moreover, no one is stopping Coppola from joining a religion that accepts his view of marriage. If he respected diversity, he would practice it by finding a new home. Instead, he seeks to impose his agenda on the rest of us, thus showing nothing but contempt for the rights of Catholics.

It’s too bad Catholics on Long Island did not get a chance to see what was in the three boxes. It would have been a great optic.

The following letter by Bill Donohue was e-mailed today to California lawmakers:

Dear California Legislator:

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, after trashing the pope and the Eucharist, were granted a tax-exempt status (EIN: 94-3032120).

Nothing has changed since. On April 19, the Sisters will stage their “Hunky Jesus” contest; they will continue their assault on Jesus, the sacraments and nuns, as they do every year at this annual event.

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). I would be happy to provide you with plentiful evidence of this group’s bigoted behavior, if requested.

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