Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on The Satanic Temple:

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times about The Satanic Temple said the organization “describes itself as a political activism group that promotes certain beliefs such as free will and political tolerance.” Satanists believe in free will and political tolerance? That inspired me to check out their website.

What I found was surprising: The Satanic Temple is obsessed with abortion. Its mission statement says it offers “legal protection against laws that unscientifically restrict women’s reproductive autonomy.” So critical is abortion to these Satanists that they have a “Religious Rights Reproductive Rights Campaign”: it advocates on behalf of the so-called religious rights of Satanists to campaign for abortion.

The Satanic Temple has a list of legal restrictions on abortion that it finds objectionable: they range from ultrasound tests that allow the mother to hear the heartbeat of her baby to mandatory waiting periods. They also seek to undermine crisis pregnancy centers. So zealous are the Satanists in their quest for abortion rights that they oppose burial rights for the remains of children who have been aborted. To say they love abortion is hardly a stretch.

I decided to engage The Satanic Temple on this issue. Here is the email exchange:

Q: “I’m curious. Why is abortion such a big issue for Satanists?” [Nov. 13]

A: “It isn’t abortion per se, it is personal freedom.” [Nov. 13]

Q: “But if the personal freedom of a woman to have an abortion results in the wholesale denial of personal freedom for her baby, how is that a victory for liberty?” [Nov. 15]

A: “Because it isn’t a baby.” [Nov. 15]

So there you have it. A pregnant woman who, unless interrupted naturally or unnaturally, will give birth to a baby is not carrying a baby.

Two years ago, Pope Francis called abortion an “absolute evil.” And he never heard of The Satanic Temple.

Contact: satanictempleorg@gmail.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the agenda of lay Catholics seeking reform:

Over the past two weeks, the U.S. bishops have been inundated with advice from lay Catholics on how to reform the Church. Some have been responsible and deserve a voice, but many have been irresponsible and deserve to be ignored.

Who are the problem lay people? They are agenda-ridden Catholics who want to turn the Catholic Church into a mainline Protestant denomination. Here’s a sampling of what they want. (Keep in mind their advice is supposed to resolve the sexual abuse scandal.)

Alexander Stille, writing in the New York Review of Books, wants an end to celibacy and demands women priests. Readers of the Baltimore Sun were told the same thing in two different columns, one by Dan Rodricks and the other by Stephen J. Stahley. James Heaney, writing for the Commonweal website, says we must end celibacy.

Activists chimed in as well. Anne Haddad, a leader of Women of the New Testament, wants women priests. Another group, The Women Who Stayed, decided to up the ante and demand women cardinals.

Others were more ambitious. John Gehring, who is funded by the atheist, Catholic-hating billionaire, George Soros, told readers of the New York Times that the problem with the Church is patriarchy and the Church’s teachings on sexuality. A new entity, 5 Theses, says we need to normalize “LGBTQ relationships and same sex marriage,” and need to ordain “married men, women, and people of all genders.” It did not say who the latter are or what they might look like.

Even those who are not lay Catholics got into the mix. George Shultz, an elderly economist and an Episcopalian, told the Washington Post that we need to end celibacy and welcome women priests. Father Alexander Santora of New Jersey demands a married clergy and “greater acceptance for gay clergy.”

None of these people bothered to tell us how we would resolve the problem of clergy sexual abuse by changing the Church’s teachings on ordination or sexuality. That they refuse to state the obvious—this has been a homosexual scandal all along—only weakens their position.

They are also seemingly unaware of the fact that many of the Protestant mainline denominations that adopted these reforms are crashing—they’ve been in free fall for decades. Indeed, the decline in membership was driven by these reforms! Why is it seen as “progressive” to adopt strictures that cause a regression?

Sexual abuse by homosexual priests has been checked since the Dallas reforms of 2002, making it all the more ludicrous to adopt these irrational reforms. Fortunately, few bishops will listen to them.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial in today’s Washington Post:

In the first paragraph of the November 13 editorial in the Washington Post, it says that the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church “raged unchecked for decades and, even after it was exposed in 2002 by the Boston Globe, has been met by the church hierarchy with denial, temporizing, stone walling and half-measures.” That is factually wrong.

Indeed, during this time span, no institution in America, religious or secular, has had less of a problem with the sexual abuse of minors than the Catholic Church.

Here are the data on the number of clergymen (priests and deacons) who have had a credible accusation (not substantiated) made against them during the year listed.

2004                  22
2005                    9
2006                  14
2007                    4
2008                  10
2009                    6
2010                    7
2011                    9
2012                    6
2013                    9
2014                    6
2015                    7
2016                    2
2017                    6
——————————-
Average:          8.36

Consider the most recent reports on this subject, covering the last two years for which we have data: .005 percent of the clergy have had a credible accusation made against them.

There is no basis in reality for the Washington Post to conclude that the Dallas norms adopted by the bishops in 2002 have not worked. Clearly they have. Here’s why.

Review boards staffed by professionals in several fields are empowered to deal with accusations. Once an allegation is deemed credible (the bar is quite low) the accused must step aside pending an investigation. Moreover, virtually every person who works or volunteers for the Church must undergo training programs learning how to combat the sexual abuse of minors.

Also, many dioceses now have programs that invite alleged victims to come forward in pursuit of justice. It was just such a program that led Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York, to turn in a sitting cardinal (McCarrick), as well as one of his auxiliary bishops. What institution can match these initiatives? Certainly not the public schools, about which we hear nothing from those who never stop bashing the Catholic Church.

There is much work to be done, but fair-minded assessments of the progress that has been made since the Dallas reforms would not concur with the misinformed editorial in the Washington Post.

Contact Fred Hiatt, editorial page editor: Fred.Hiatt@washpost.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the passing of Dr. Herbert I. London:

Conservatives lost a giant of a man on November 11 with the passing of Herb London. He was a brilliant and courageous professor, writer, and activist, one who inspired everyone around him. He was 79.

I first met Herb in the 1980s. Beginning in the 1990s, we worked together on some issues of interest to Jews and Catholics; Beth Gilinsky of the Jewish Action Alliance was our mutual friend who pioneered these causes. Herb never backed down to anyone.

Herb and I both received our doctorates at New York University: his was in history, mine was in sociology. Several years ago, Herb and I were on the same program at NYU. We got a chance to confront those on the left in front of newly minted Ph.D. students from around the world. It proved to be a joyous occasion.

In the 1970s, Herb was Dean of NYU’s Gallatin Division, a great books program. In the 1980s, he co-founded the National Association of Scholars; I served on the board of directors with him for 20 years. In the 1990s, he took over the Hudson Institute, and later founded his own London Center for Policy Research. He was an educational entrepreneur.

Herb London will be sorely missed. God bless him.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the meeting of the U.S. bishops next week:

On November 12, the bishops will convene in Baltimore for what promises to be an important meeting. All eyes will be on a series of reforms that address sexual abuse, especially as it concerns the role of bishops. The 2002 Dallas norms applied to priests, but not the bishops.

Central to the meeting is the role of the laity. There have been many calls by the laity over the past few months seeking to influence the discussion, and some have organized. In fact, some will be present when the bishops assemble, hoping to have their voice heard. They cover a wide range of views. Some are responsible and some are an utter disgrace.

Should the bishops listen to the laity? Of course. Should the laity govern? No. They should know their place: Their role is advisory. If the bishops want to extend greater authority to them, they can, but it smacks of arrogance for the laity to think that they are better equipped to run the Church than the bishops. Many of them can’t even run their own lives without crashing on a daily basis.

Who among the laity should the bishops listen to? The ones who know their place. The first time I sat down with Cardinal John O’Connor was in December 1993. I started working at the Catholic League—our office was in the Catholic Center (the same building where O’Connor worked) on July 1, 1993. I had made some media splashes, motivating O’Connor to write about me. We had met briefly at a public event in the fall, but now he wanted to have a meeting.

Within five minutes, O’Connor asked me, “What do you need?” “Nothing,” I said. A few minutes later, he asked the same question, pressing me to respond. I said, “I want nothing from you. I came to serve you. I came to inherit your problems.” He turned to his assistant, an attorney, and said he could count on one hand the number of times this has happened to him over the years.

That’s why O’Connor listened to me. So have some other bishops. I don’t have a hidden agenda—the Catholic League is here to defend the Church against wrongdoing. I hasten to add that we are not here to defend wrongdoing committed by the clergy.

Any lay person who wants to help the bishops deal with the issue of sexual abuse should be as committed to the rights of the accused as he is to the welfare of victims. Unfortunately, we hear a great deal about the latter these days, but little about the former.

In today’s environment it takes courage to insist on the due process rights of priests and bishops who are accused of sexual misconduct. However, not to do so is a grave injustice. All of the accused must be considered innocent until proven otherwise, and there should be no exception for anyone who works for the Catholic Church.

There are serious juridical issues that will constrain the bishops from adopting measures to effectively address wrongdoing done by those in their own ranks. It is therefore not helpful to raise expectations of reform too much; canon law can be changed, but existing norms cannot be ignored. Any real changes must be embraced by Rome.

Bishops looking for guidance on which lay groups and individuals they should listen to should keep in mind the content of the proposed reforms and the tone of those making them. They should sniff out lay clericalism whenever it arises.

Beware of those on the right and the left who are proposing a mountain of reforms. Some are so intrusive as to be a menace. As a corollary, beware of those who pledge to “fix” everything. It should never be assumed that everything the bishops have done is in need of repair.

Indeed, the bishops need to be more vocal in touting their successes: the fact that in the last two years for which we have data, only .005 percent of the clergy have had a credible accusation made against them is testimony to the success of the Dallas reforms.

Tone matters. When the laity become lordly, look out. The most recent example is the condescending editorial posted on November 9 by the National Catholic Reporter. It does not advise the bishops—it lectures them. That this is coming from the same people who reject the Church’s teachings on sexuality, and who have long promoted a libertine vision—one that was adopted by many seminaries in the late 1960s and the 1970s, causing the sexual abuse scandal—makes the editorial all the more despicable.

There are those on the right and the left who are purists, men and women who insist that all the bishops are corrupt and should resign. No, those making such charges should resign. Sweeping generalizations made about any demographic group—indicting all of its leaders—are morally irresponsible.

Most of the bishops, like most of the priests, are good men. They need the support of the laity in times like these. What they don’t need is to be shouted at by self-righteous savants.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the issue of clergy abuse in the Archdiocese of Atlanta:

Atlanta Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory has released the names of priests who have been credibly accused of molesting a minor since 1956. He included deacons and seminarians, as well as those from religious orders.

The list typifies sexual abuse in the Catholic Church found elsewhere in the United States: most of the cases are old, and most were dealt with judiciously.

Of the fifteen men named, seven are dead and the others have either been laicized, removed from ministry, or convicted (some fall into more than one category); there are no data on one priest. Most of the offenses took place in the last century, beginning in the late 1950s.

Some media stories call the release of this list a “bombshell.” Nonsense. We would expect that in any institution where adults and minors interact, there will be some level of sexual misconduct. Catholics rightly hold priests to a higher standard, but even so, the fact that there are fifteen bad priests over a period of 62 years is hardly “bombshell” news. And compared to whom?

We don’t know how many kids were abused by ministers in the Atlanta area over the past six decades, and that’s because none of the clergy have released the data. We surely do not know how many elementary and secondary students have been sexually molested in the Atlanta public schools, and that’s because the teachers’ unions, and the politicians whom they grease, won’t allow it.

Regarding the public schools, while hard data are unavailable, there are enough interesting nuggets provided by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC), and other media outlets, to raise the eyebrows of all fair-minded persons.

For example, in 2016 AJC criticized the failure of the states and the federal government to keep updated statistics on the sexual abuse of public school students by teachers. We know from other articles that 46 teachers in Georgia, 14 from Atlanta, had their licenses pulled in 2001 because of sexual misconduct with students. Other stories detail how schools learned of sexual abuse but did nothing about it.

There are many AJC articles on specific teachers who have abused students (Gwinnett County, which is just outside Atlanta, but within the Archdiocese of Atlanta, has had its fair share of abuse cases). Last year, five teachers (mostly from Gwinnett) were arrested within one month for sexual misconduct with students, ranging from groping to rape. This past May, a former Atlanta middle-school employee was taken into custody for sexually abusing a male student at least six times since the beginning of the year.

Last month, a teacher at a Georgia high school was accused of molesting a 13-year-old girl. And a few weeks ago, another teacher was arrested on several counts: sexual battery against a child under the age of 16, sexual assault while a teacher, attempted sexual exploitation of a child and tampering with evidence, as well as four counts of distributing obscene material.

Why aren’t cases like these, and there are many of them, considered “bombshell” news?

Predatory priests in the Atlanta Archdiocese have been dealt with. The same is not true of predatory teachers in Atlanta: The problem in the public schools is not confined to the past—it is ongoing.

If we are serious about the sexual abuse of minors, then the kind of investigations that the Catholic Church has been subjected to should be launched against the public schools nationwide. Not to do so is to evince religious profiling and anti-Catholic bigotry, to say nothing of insincerity dealing with this serious issue.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a news release published by the Departments of Health and Human Services, Treasury, and Labor on the subject of religious exemptions:

When giving the Commencement Address at the University of Notre Dame in 2009, President Barack Obama said, “Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause.” His administration never did. Worse, it sought to violate conscience rights of pro-life Americans.

When Donald Trump was running for president in 2016, he pledged to undo the damage that his predecessor did to conscience rights. Now he has made good on his promise. On November 7, his administration released final rules on conscience rights for Americans who object to paying for abortion-inducing drugs and contraceptives in their insurance plans. They will take effect two months from now.

President Trump had to undo the Health and Human Services mandate established by the Obama administration. That provision sought to force organizations such as the Little Sisters of the Poor to violate their conscience by paying for morally objectionable services in their health insurance plans.

Under the new rules, an exemption is being afforded “from the contraceptive coverage mandate to entities and individuals that object to services covered by the mandate on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs.” The rules are inclusive of “nonprofit organizations, small businesses, and individuals that have non-religious moral convictions.”

Kudos to President Trump for affirming religious liberty and conscience rights.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

An editorial in the November 7 Philadelphia Inquirer, commenting on the November 4 story it jointly published with the Boston Globe, said the papers found that since 2002 “the leaders of the U.S. Catholic Church are far better at covering up child sexual abuse than stopping it.”

This is factually inaccurate. It is not even remotely true. Since the Dallas reforms were passed by the bishops in 2002, there has been a marked decline in current charges of sexual abuse against the clergy—almost all the allegations that have come forward in the past 16 years are about offenses in the last century.

In fact, just .005 percent of the clergy have had a substantiated charge made against them in the last two years: six allegations were substantiated between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017; two were substantiated between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016.

Does the Philadelphia Inquirer know of any institution, religious or secular, that has a better record than that?

Moreover, owing to the diligence of New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, former cardinal Theodore McCarrick is no longer in ministry. And just last week, one of Dolan’s auxiliary bishops, John Jenik, stepped down pending a probe of allegations made against him for offenses that took place decades ago. Dolan was responsible for that as well.

Does the Philadelphia Inquirer know of any institution, religious or secular, where its leaders turn in one of their own?

In spite of the progress that has been made, the newspaper has the gall to say that the Church is “incapable of policing itself,” and instead calls on what it terms “professionals—prosecutors who understand the law and know how to adjudicate crimes” to take over.

They had such a person, the former District Attorney of Philadelphia, Seth Williams. But he is now in prison. They also had the former Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Kathleen Kane; she was convicted of several serious crimes and is awaiting her prison sentence. If anything, Pennsylvania needs to hire Cardinal Dolan to clean house throughout the state. Or they could hire Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput—he doesn’t lack for integrity or guts either.

Even more infuriating is the arrogance of the Philadelphia Inquirer. It says the Church “should turn over its secret archives.” The Church should turn over nothing, not at least until the Philadelphia Inquirer turns over its secret archives on Paul Davies.

Davies was the deputy editorial page editor from 2007 to 2011. Reports surfaced in 2011 that he was fired for running a front-page story in the “Currents” section that detailed what a rip-off the Philadelphia Convention Center was. The newspaper denied the allegation but refused to comment on the matter saying it is “company policy not to discuss personnel matters relative to former employees.” Yet it demands that the Church turn over its files to them!

The Inquirer should open its secret archives on Davies so the public can learn the truth. That he was rehired in 2016 does not resolve this issue: The editorial welcoming him back on August 18, 2016 never mentioned why he left in the first place. We know he threatened to sue the paper in 2011 but we don’t know what happened after that. Why the secret?

Finally, the newspaper argues that state legislators should lift the statute of limitations on crimes involving the sexual abuse of minors. Will the paper implore lawmakers to include the public schools in this legislation? Or will it do what it always does and just favor targeting the Catholic Church?

The Philadelphia Inquirer reeks of hypocrisy.

Contact Sandra Shea, managing editor, opinion: sshea@phillynews.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the midterm election results:

It was a good night for Christians. In two of the three states that had ballot initiatives protecting the rights of the unborn, they won: Alabama and West Virginia affirmed the right to life of children in the womb, and they also banned public funding of abortion; Oregon made it easier for a woman to abort her child.

Alabama voters affirmed religious liberty by ensuring that a person’s religious beliefs will have no effect on his civil or political rights; they also voted to allow a display of the Ten Commandments on public property.

Pro-life candidates squared off against abortion-rights candidates in the 36 states that had gubernatorial races. In September, National Right to Life listed 26 of the races as the ones to watch. Our own tally today found that the pro-life candidate won 17 of those races; 9 were won by the abortion-rights candidate.

This takes on more significance when we consider that Planned Parenthood launched its largest voter contact campaign for midterm elections in history.

NARAL told voters that abortion is a children’s rights issue. “The research is clear. Restricting abortion access doesn’t just harm women. It harms their children as well.” It also tweeted, “When women are denied abortions, it affects the lives of the kids they already have.”

NARAL is right about that, but for the wrong reason: it traumatizes children to learn that their mother aborted their prospective brother or sister—they realize that it could have been them!

Perhaps the best election news is the uptick in pro-life senators. President Trump will now have an easier time getting judges appointed who are not given to discovering rights that are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on President Trump’s pick to head the NEA:

President Trump has nominated Mary Anne Carter to be the new chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). We are delighted with his choice. It is one of the most important posts in the nation affecting the culture, and we trust that Ms. Carter will not disappoint us. She needs to be confirmed by the Senate.

Carter is well prepared to hit the ground running. She has served as senior White House advisor to the NEA since the early days of the Trump administration, and has been acting chairman since June. Her advocacy for the arts has won the plaudits of Republicans and Democrats alike.

Raised in a military family, “MAC” as she is called by her friends, was chosen by Florida Governor Rick Scott to be his chief of staff. She oversaw and implemented his agenda, handling everything from budgetary matters to communications. Prior to that position, she served as Executive Director for Conservatives for Patients’ Rights. She also did a stint at the Heritage Foundation where she was Director of U.S. Senate Relations.

This announcement means a great deal to the Catholic League. For the past ten months, we have been pushing for a morally responsible person to head the NEA. Here’s why.

At the end of last year, we learned that the most obscene assault on Christians ever staged, “Jerry Springer: The Opera,” was coming to New York City in January. An NEA grant was given to the production company of this vile musical, the New Group, under the tenure of the outgoing NEA chairman, Dr. Jane Chu.

On January 23, 2018, I held a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. objecting to the NEA funding of the New Group. I was joined by Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center and a member of the Catholic League’s advisory board, Dr. Deal Hudson of the Christian Review and a member of the Catholic League’s board of directors, and Ralph Reed, founder and president of the Faith and Freedom Coalition.

The next day I sent a letter to President Trump asking him to honor my request: “Please appoint someone who will not continue to fund anti-Catholic grantees, exhibitions, or performances.”

By choosing Mary Anne Carter to head the NEA, President Trump has made good on our request. Congratulations to him, Ms. Carter, and all of those who supported us in this effort. This is also a victory for the arts, properly understood.