Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a bill before California Gov. Gavin Newsom:

The California legislature has sent a bill to Gov. Gavin Newsom that he should forthrightly veto. The bill is based on a vicious lie: it contends that St. Junípero Serra was responsible for the mass murder of Indians in the 18th century. The purpose of the bill is to replace a statue of Serra at the Capitol in Sacramento with a new monument that celebrates the indigenous population.

The bill is not only based on bad history, it is a slanderous attack on the one man who actually did stand up for the rights of Indians at the time.

Here is what it says: “Enslavement of both adults and children, mutilation, genocide, and assault on women were all part of the mission period initiated and overseen by Father Serra.”

In 2014, a year before Pope Francis canonized Serra, I read many books on the priest. I did so knowing that some of the Church’s detractors would exploit the occasion in 2015, seeking to blame Serra for the offenses committed by the Spaniards. The result was the publication of a monograph, “The Noble Legacy of Father Serra.” (It can be found on the Catholic League’s website; a shorter version is also available.)

Known as the greatest missionary in U.S. history, Serra traveled 24,000 miles, baptizing and confirming thousands of persons, mostly Indians (in 1777 the Vatican authorized the Franciscan priest to administer the sacrament of confirmation, usually the reserve of the bishop). He had one goal—to facilitate eternal salvation for the Indians of North America.

Not only did Serra not initiate or approve the inhumane treatment of the Indians, he led the protests against it. Importantly, the Spanish Crown ultimately agreed with his position.

Some of the Spanish colonizers did mistreat the Indian women. But Serra not only objected, he took specific measures to stem the tide of abuse.

Charging Serra with genocide is obscene. Genocide is what Hitler did to the Jews. Serra never killed anyone. Those making this mind-boggling accusation are literally creating a narrative that has no basis in fact. Hitler put Jews in ovens; the missionaries put the Indians to work, paying them for their labor.

Serra employed Indians as teachers, and the missionaries taught them how to be masons, carpenters, blacksmiths, and painters. They were also taught how to sell and buy animals, and were allowed to keep their bounty. Women were taught spinning, knitting, and sewing.

Does this sound like the Nazis?

Professor Gregory Orfalea, author of Journey to the Sun: Junípero Serra’s Dream and the Founding of California, published by Scribner in 2014, writes that “To the Indian, he [Serra] was loving, enthusiastic, and spiritually and physically devoted.”

Salvatore J. Cordileone and Jose H. Gomez, the archbishops of San Francisco and Los Angeles, respectively, have a timely piece on St. Serra in today’s Wall Street Journal. They recommend that the statue of Serra, which was torn down last year during the riots and is now in storage, be returned to the state’s Capitol, along with a new monument honoring the indigenous Californians.

The bill before Gov. Newsom is the product of disinformation promoted by Black Lives Matter and other left-wing activists. It is propaganda, not scholarship.

We are urging everyone to let Gov. Newsom know that to sign this bill is to smear St. Serra and insult millions of Catholics, not only in California but all over the world.

Contact Jim DeBoo, executive secretary to Gov. Newsom: Jim.Deboo@gov.ca.gov

The University of Pittsburgh has agreed to have its fetal tissue research practices independently reviewed by the Washington, D.C. law firm of Hyman, Phelps & McNamara. Last month, the Catholic League called upon the Pennsylvania Auditor General to launch such an investigation.

We are delighted that Pitt got the message.

Over the summer, we learned that Judicial Watch was representing the Center for Medical Progress in a quest to obtain documentation of alleged human organ harvesting at Pitt. According to their probe, organs have been harvested while the baby’s heart is still beating. The University has steadfastly denied wrongdoing.

On August 17, Bill Donohue wrote to Pennsylvania Auditor General, Timothy L. DeFoor, asking him to determine whether state and federal funds are being used by Pitt for arguably criminal activity. He sent a copy of the letter to Pitt’s chancellor, the dean of the medical school and a press official at the University.

As important as anything, in our news release that same day, we printed the email address of the Auditor General, asking our subscribers to contact him. Thousands did, and their effort paid dividends.

Is Pitt involved in a fetal organ “chop shop”? We do not know. But we need to find out without delay.

“If it is true,” Donohue said in his letter to the Auditor General, “as some doctors have said, that in order to perform some of these procedures, ‘The baby’s going to have to be either born alive or be killed immediately prior to delivery,’ then justice demands that a thorough investigation take place. I urge you to do so.”

In February, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities issued an excellent statement on the propriety of human fetal tissue research. It implored the government, which allows abortion, not to “add injury to insult by treating the innocent abortion victim as a convenient laboratory animal for research protocols deemed unethical when applied to other members of the human family.”

If Pitt has nothing to hide, then so be it. But if some of the horrible accusations are true, then it must cease and desist and be held accountable.

We are pleased to have played an important role in getting to the bottom of this issue. Many thanks to those who let their voice be heard.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on what 9/11 means to him:

The 20th anniversary of 9/11 carries great significance to all Americans (at least those who are patriotic), but it has a special meaning for Christians. First some thoughts on the fateful day.

On September 11, 2001, I was in my Manhattan office typing away when I heard a male staffer scream. It was around 8:50 a.m. He said something about the World Trade Center (the Twin Towers could easily be seen by looking south from our 34th floor office). A big hole, with smoke coming out, could be seen in one of the high floors of the two buildings. I thought that some errant pilot had crashed into it, so I told everyone to go back to work.

Minutes later there was another scream, and this time I saw the immediate aftermath of the crash. I also knew we were at war. This was no accident—this was Islamists at war with America. We witnessed the towers go down, one floor after another, collapsing like pancakes.

No one could leave New York. The police had cordoned off the Penn Station area where our office is. I surveyed the staff and noticed that some were freaking out. So I said we are leaving. I told them we were going for pizza and beer—just sitting around staring out the window was not healthy.

At the pizza joint we could not escape what happened. TVs were on in every corner. I said a prayer, and some Jewish men sitting nearby joined in with us. We later departed and made our way home.

So why is 9/11 special to Christians? For weeks on end, all we saw on TV in New York were ceremonies and funerals for the first responders. We lost 343 firefighters, including the department chief of the FDNY, first deputy commissioner, one of the marshals, and a Catholic chaplain, Father Mychal Judge. We also lost 60 police officers from various units.

A year later I asked staff members to call various New York fire departments, and the NYPD, to see if they had any official statistics, based on religion, of who died. No official data were available, but the most common estimates were that 85-90 percent were Catholic.

This was not surprising. After all, TV coverage of the funerals were almost all at Catholic churches. New York City, being heavily Catholic and Jewish, was always known for its high concentration of Catholics in the FDNY and NYPD.

Today, roughly 70 percent of the armed forces is comprised of Christians; non-Christians are underrepresented. Among veterans, religious Americans, most of whom are Christian, are overrepresented. Indeed, one-in-five religious Americans are veterans. This is about twice the proportion found among those who have no religious affiliation. Indeed, those with no religion are 50-60 percent less likely to have served in the armed forces.

Religious Americans are also more generous in contributing to charities, and this includes those who gave to a 9/11 organization or event. According to Arthur C. Brooks, one of the nation’s premier chroniclers of charitable giving, “People who never attended church were 11 percentage points less likely than regular churchgoers to give to a 9/11 cause (56 to 67 percent).”

If people of faith, especially Christians, have given so much to our nation, why are they treated with such derision by left-wing activists and pundits? Why are they maliciously compared to the vicious barbarians known as the Taliban?

Just last month, MSNBC host Joy Reid warned of the “religious right,” saying the nation was threatened by those “dreaming of a theocracy that would impose a particular brand of Christianity on American society.”

Actor Tim Russ of “Star Trek” fame fumed that “The Taliban are as fanatical about their beliefs and culture as the millions of people right here in the U.S. who believe in religion, conspiracy theories, and alternate reality.” He previously said that the U.S. “already has Sharia law,” which he identified as “Christian Sharia Law.”

Michael Moore said that upon the evacuation of Americans from Afghanistan, it was time to defend our nation “against our own domestic Taliban.” The left-wing activist previously identified them as Christians.

We at the Catholic League have also been called the Taliban, even though, to my knowledge, no one who has worked here has ever walked the streets with a machete or thrown a homosexual off a building. No matter, in 2010, because I merely objected to a publicly funded artistic attack on Catholics, a professor of “Queer Studies” labeled the Catholic League the “American Taliban.”

As a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, I am proud of my country. I am also proud to be a Catholic. It means a lot to me that Christians have had such a big role in defending us. But I have nothing but contempt for those who besmirch their efforts.

It is sickening to note that among those who have benefited the most from the sacrifices of the military are those who never served a day in their life but are quick to trash conservative Christians. The Michael Moores of this world are the real disgrace, not faithful Americans who continue to protect them.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial in today’s New York Times:

No newspaper in the country likes protests more than the New York Times. There is a qualifier, though, as made clear in the September 8th edition.

Michelle Cottle is a member of the editorial board of the New York Times. “Chaos at the School Board Meeting” is the title of her editorial-page column. She does not like chaos. To be more precise, she does not like the politics of those creating chaos at school board meetings, many of whom object to mask mandates and left-wing exercises in thought control.

Cottle opens her diatribe with this screamer, “America’s school board meetings are out of control.” What’s wrong with that? After all, the Times all but cheered Black Lives Matter and Antifa last year when they took to the streets engaging in mayhem. These thugs took part in over 600 riots, resulting in a considerable loss of life and property.

Why is “chaos” at school board meetings objectionable, but not the truly “out of control” violence of Black Lives Matter and Antifa?

Cottle cites as an example of school board “chaos” the meetings in Loudoun County, Virginia. She says, quite rightly, that critical race theory and a transgender-laden curriculum have “drawn the wrath of parents.” With good reason.

Unlike her, these “chaotic” parents object to teachers being forced to accept the racist dogma that defines critical race theory. They also object to teachers being punished for refusing to call a boy a girl, and vice versa  (the school was forced by the courts to reinstate the teacher).

Another problem for Cottle are parents who worry about their children being “indoctrinated or otherwise manipulated” by educators. What she says is actually worse than this—the indoctrination is in full swing at our nation’s leading colleges and universities.

When Ivy League institutions hold separate graduation ceremonies for multiple demographic groups, all of whom have one perceived grievance or another (e.g., Columbia), and when they force incoming freshmen to sit through presentations on racism that are themselves patently racist (Princeton), they are no longer engaged in education. They are engaged in indoctrination.

The good news is that Cottle and her colleagues admit that conservative parents are pushing back against highly politicized school boards. If there is one good thing that the pandemic has wrought, it is a new awareness on the part of previously unsuspecting parents of the extent to which education is being corrupted by left-wing ideologues.

What the New York Times fears most is “power to the people.” When the people stand up, the elites are forced to sit down.

Contact Michelle Cottle: Michelle.Cottle@nytimes.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on President Biden’s latest remark on the beginning of life:

“Life begins at conception, that’s the Church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.” That is what Vice President Joe Biden said in 2012, echoing what he said in 2008.

“I respect those who believe life begins at the moment of conception. I don’t agree, but I respect that.” That is what President Biden said last week.

The science did not change, Mr. Biden, and neither has the Catholic Church’s teaching on this subject. So why did you?

If life does not begin at conception, Mr. Biden, then when does it begin?

Does life begin when the baby’s spinal cord, nervous system, gastrointestinal system, heart and lungs develop? That would be during the first four weeks from conception.

Does it begin when the heart begins to beat? That would be four weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s head develops? That would be five weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s nose forms and his or her fingers begin to develop? That would be six weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s toes appear? That would be seven weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s elbows bend? That would be eight weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s genitals develop? That would be nine weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby’s fingernails form? That would be ten weeks after conception.

Does it begin when the baby kicks, can hear, has a strong grip and a strong heartbeat? That would be during the second trimester.

Does it begin at birth?

Does it begin sometime after birth?

When, Mr. Biden, does life begin? And why is science, and the teachings of your religion, wrong on this subject? Where is your evidence, Mr. Biden, that they are wrong? We need to know as this is literally a matter of life and death.

Contact White House press secretary Jen Psaki: jennifer.r.psaki@who.eop.gov

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a court decision that may have wide implications for thought control:

The Virginia Supreme Court made a wise decision when it said it would not accept a challenge to a lower court ruling that required Loudoun County Public Schools to reinstate a teacher who was punished for not acknowledging that boys can be girls, and vice versa.

The victim in this case, Tanner Cross, argued that his Christian convictions did not permit him to lie about sex transitioning. He knows it is child abuse. So does every honest person who knows anything about the subject, which unfortunately excludes many in the healthcare profession and education.

The school district violated this teacher’s freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion. It had the gall to maintain that Cross was suspended not for his speech but for the “disruption” he caused at a school board meeting in May.

He was being sanctioned because of what civil libertarian Harry Kalven once called the “heckler’s veto.” In short, this means that those who are upset about someone’s speech can effectively veto his First Amendment right by holding him responsible for their planned, or actual, disruptive behavior.

This is not a matter of speculation. In 1949, the U.S. Supreme Court overthrew the conviction of a suspended Catholic priest who gave an incendiary speech in Chicago. A riot took place outside the hall where he spoke, and he was held accountable for the mob’s behavior. The high court overturned his conviction. Had it not done so, it would have been the death knell to robust speech of any kind.

There was another dustup in June in Loudoun County when parents objected to the adoption of critical race theory (CRT). School officials mandated, without offering any proof that there was a problem with racism in the district, that all teachers accept the racist dogma associated with this ideology.

An economist who lives in this area, Max B. Sawicky, recently defended the school district for ordering teachers to abide by CRT. In an article posted by The New Republic, he lashed out at parents and teachers who objected to it. He denied that CRT was racist. He is wrong.

“White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the system of white supremacy.” Those are the words of Robin DiAngelo, one of the gurus of this pernicious brand of hate speech.

Ironically, those who live in Loudoun are mostly white privileged people, the very ones seen as racists by CRT activists. Sawicky brags that “Loudoun is one of the richest counties in the United States,” where “Joe Biden received 62 percent of the vote.”

These are precisely the kind of people who are most likely to deny that there are only two sexes. Not surprisingly, Sawicky berates “Christian fundamentalist teachers” who object to having their religious rights abrogated by sexually confused elites. He also rails against “anti-CRT fanatics” who object to branding all white people as racists.

More important, there is no shortage of left-wing totalitarians who want to use the power of the state to dictate how people think about transgenderism and CRT. Their penchant for thought control makes these people the most dangerous segment in American society today. They need to be resisted and defeated.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio:

The Most Reverend Nicholas DiMarzio, Bishop of Brooklyn, has been exonerated by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican of charges that he sexually abused minors. It is a credit to New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, who was authorized by the Vatican to conduct an investigation, that he took this assignment seriously by hiring a law firm that retained former FBI Director Louis Freeh to do this job.

As I previously indicated, the allegations against DiMarzio were bogus from the start. In November 2019, Mitchell Garabedian, an unethical lawyer, announced that he was suing DiMarzio for abusing an 11-year-old boy, Mark Matzek, when he was a young priest in the 1970s. DiMarzio categorically denied the charges and Garabedian took several months before he acted on his claim.

In June 2020, Garabedian said he found another “victim” who said he was abused around the same time as Matzek. Once again, the Boston-based attorney did not move quickly against DiMarzio, settling for a PR smear of the bishop; he finally followed through.

The alleged second victim, Samier Tadros, said DiMarzio abused him in Holy Rosary Church in the Archdiocese of Newark. Yet as the bishop said, Tadros “did not attend the parish or the parish school and does not appear to have been Catholic.”

Here is what I said on June 4, 2020. “Why would anyone wait a half century to bring a lawsuit? How is it possible that the parents of these boys [Garabedian’s two clients] never knew about it [the alleged abuse]—Tadros says the abuse started when he was 6-years-old and happened ‘repeatedly’—especially given its alleged serial nature?”

It seems clear that DiMarzio was pursued by Garabedian because he opposed unjust discriminatory legislation that singled out the Catholic Church for retribution over crimes against minors. This was payback.

This was reminiscent of a former office holder who accused DiMarzio in 2016 of offering her a $5,000 bribe. It was a lie. She admitted she was wrong about the date of their meeting—by three years—and wrong about the venue. She was also wrong about her accusation, which was undercut by witnesses at the meeting.

Bishops, like all priests who have been accused, are entitled to due process, and all priests, regardless of rank, should be held to the same standards by the Church, as well as by civil authorities, when they are accused.

Bishop DiMarzio is an honorable man, a great servant of the Church who is understandably loved by those who know him. He should never have had to go through these ordeals. But then again we live in a time when some very vicious persons are out to sunder the Catholic Church.

[Note: In a few weeks, Ignatius Press will publish my new book, “The Truth About Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes.” While I discuss Garabedian, I do not mention the DiMarzio case because it was still unresolved when the book went to print.]