Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Christie’s latest embrace of “Piss Christ”:

Now that we are at the beginning of the Christmas season, it is only fitting that the rich and powerful flex their bigoted muscles by attacking Christian sensibilities. Enter Christie’s, the auction house that is known for appealing to morally challenged tastes.

From November 30 to December 3, Christie’s 3.0 will debut the first non-fungible token (NFT) version of Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” in Miami. It is part of the Next Wave: The Miami Edit.

What is the cause of this celebratory event? Christie’s wants to revisit what it calls the three “vandalisms” of Serrano’s artwork.

In 1987, U.S. taxpayers were forced to pay $15,000 for this masterpiece. “Piss Christ” is a photo of a jar with a crucifix submerged in Serrano’s own urine. In 1999, it sold for $277,000 at Christie’s.

Christie’s is proud of its latest milking of “Piss Christ.”

“The dynamic video NFT replicates three historic vandalisms of the original 1987 photograph on a yearly cycle. Skilfully [sic]applying the time-based mechanisms of digital art, Serrano both archives and transforms the story of his infamous photograph, underscoring its enduring legacy in the history of art and the right to creative expression.”

This statement demands a rebuttal. Were not the alleged vandals themselves involved in “creative expression”? Who is Christie’s to stigmatize these artists?

This position needs to be taken seriously given the fact that the NFT is being produced in collaboration with an entity called a/political. It bills itself as an organization that “explores radical knowledge through the principle of Cultural Terror. Working with artists and agitators, the collective platforms voices that interrogates the critical issues and dominant narratives of our time.”

In other words, a more tolerant view of the so-called vandals suggests they were really “agitators” inspired by the “principle of Culture Terror.” Their goal was not to be destructive, but to “interrogate the critical issues and dominant narratives of our time.” Seems to me they hit it out of the park.

Christie’s needs to stop being so closed minded. Its understanding of “art” needs to become more inclusive.

To see a video on “Piss Christ” that Bill Donohue did ten years ago, click here.

Contact: christiespress@christies.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Disney’s latest box office failure:

The most common word used by reviewers of Disney’s new film, “Strange World,” was “bombs.” Disney expected to bring in $30 to $40 million over Thanksgiving weekend, but instead netted only $18.6 million. That’s pretty bad considering it cost $180 million to make the flick.

It is expected to cost Disney $100 million when the final numbers are posted. The Wrap called it “one of Disney’s biggest failures ever,” saying it was the “biggest animated bomb in 20 years.”

What happened? Those who live inside the Hollywood bubble can’t figure it out. But parents can.

“Strange World” was the first animated movie for children featuring a gay teen romance. That’s not what most parents want their kids to see: they don’t want to sexualize their children.

Disney was founded as a family-friendly organization. In more recent years it became a gay-friendly outfit, and now it has gone beyond that by showing no tolerance for parents who do not ascribe to the politics of  sexual engineers.

Very few of the reviewers who slammed the movie mentioned that it was  subject to parental backlash. Instead, some critics floated a conspiracy theory maintaining that Disney wanted the movie to bomb.

“Here’s the theory,” says TMZ. “Disney could use the poor performance as rationale to not include LGBTQ characters going forward….” It even floated the idea that the LGBT character was “scapegoated,” as a foil for not going down this road again.

This is nonsense. Disney made this movie for two reasons: it wanted to make money and it wanted to advance the cause of gay activists.

Have these critics not remembered that earlier this year Disney sought to impose its morally debased ideas on children in kindergarten through the third grade? It intentionally sought to do battle with Florida Gov. DeSantis for promoting a bill designed to protect parental rights, one which prohibited teachers from questioning children on whether they were satisfied being a boy or a girl.

Parents have not forgotten, nor are they forgiving.

No movie tabloid was more out of touch than the Hollywood Reporter. Pamela McClintock said “Strange World” bombed because of poor marketing. She opined that it was “pummeled by poor word-of-mouth.”

She is twice wrong. In fact, “word-of-mouth” succeeded brilliantly: parents passed the word about Disney trying to impose its radical gay agenda on children, and it was that kind of social marketing that did the flick in.

Then there is Lovia Gyarkye of the Hollywood Reporter. She hailed the gay character, saying it was “a historic moment for the conservative studio.” Only someone living in a left-wing ghetto would call today’s Disney a “conservative” studio. She outdid herself again when she said the movie has “the makings of a new classic.” More cluelessness.

“Strange World” bombed for the same reason “Lightyear” did earlier this year. Parents don’t want to allow Hollywood to seduce their children. It’s time Disney adjusted its sails and got with the times. As some critics have noted, “woke = broke.” Broken financially, as well as morally.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Christmas movies that would be good to avoid:

Most Christmas movies are endearing, if somewhat simple, but hardly a year goes by without some studio offering some really slimy fare. This year is no exception.

Playing off of “Silent Night,” Universal Pictures is bringing out “Violent Night” on December 2. The plot involves Santa Claus seeking to rescue a family from mercenaries. Santa is anything but gentle—he is a master of violence. According to one reviewer, the movie contains “constant harsh but bloodless violence, including gunplay, explosions, and torture, some sexual humor, a few uses of profanity…and crass language.”

The movie’s director, Tommy Wirkola, previously directed “Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters,” a 2013 film which was slammed for its “pervasive gory violence.” Pat Casey and Josh Miller, the script writers, have a history of dealing with violence and Christmas. They were responsible for the 2016 miniseries, “12 Deadly Days,” which centered on a cursed California town in the 12 days leading up to Christmas.

“Violent Night” is featured on Twitter, replete with violent adaptations of traditional Christmas sayings. These include: “Time for some seasons’ beatings”; “Bruises to all, and to all a good night!”; “Merry F*cking Christmas” (a Christmas tree emoji is used in place of the asterisk).

A week later, on December 9, “Christmas Bloody Christmas” debuts, streaming on Shudder (a horror streaming service owned by AMC networks). Rated “R,” the movie features a robot toy Santa that goes on a killing rampage on Christmas Eve. According to one reviewer, the film features “a backdrop of drugs, sex, metal, and violence,” including “a blood splattered battle for survival against the ruthless Saint Nick himself.”

“The Killing Tree” is another “R” rated horror movie. It was released November 1 on Amazon Prime Video & DVD. The plot involves “a scorned widow [who] casts an ancient spell to resurrect her executed husband. However, the spell goes wrong, the husband is brought back as an evil Christmas tree, hell-bent on getting revenge on the one who caused his execution.”

This movie is noted for its bloody scenes, including “bloody splatters on the camera and mauled visitors.” The film’s tagline is, “Deck the Halls with blood!”

These flicks will not garner a big audience, but they will feed the sick needs of mostly demented men who get their kicks out of such fare. The obsession with violence at Christmastime tells us a great deal about the mentality of those behind these movies. They really have a hard time dealing with the sacred, which is why they stoop to profanities.

Do yourself a favor and watch “A Christmas Carol” one more time.

Militant secularists are in high gear the last quarter of every year.

They don’t like October because they don’t like Columbus. Why? He symbolizes Western civilization, which they loathe. They don’t like Christmas because it reminds them of Jesus Christ, whose divinity they reject.

Now that Thanksgiving is here, radical atheists are bent on discrediting the holiday, all because it represents Christianity.

Not all atheists are haters. But the activists among them tend to be that way. Most of them are unhappy people. They are unhappy with their lives, their country, Western civilization and God. What makes them feel good is perverse: They take joy in tearing down America’s religious heritage.

They do this by promoting propaganda. They are masters at taking words out of context, or literally fabricating, stories about Thanksgiving that put a negative face on it. Their goal is to spoil the holiday by expressing an affinity with Native Americans, about whom they know nothing and could care less.

Thanksgiving is a family celebration, and that is one more reason why militant secularists want to destroy it. From the period of the Enlightenment in the late 17th and 18th centuries, to the latest rants by radicals, the family has always been in their sights: They resent the idea that children should be raised exclusively by their parents. Why? Parents can thwart their social engineering ambitions.

Happy Thanksgiving! Don’t let the malcontents get in your way.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the new Disney head:

Bob Chapek, who was fired as the Disney CEO, certainly made enemies in and out of Disney. But he is not entirely to blame. Much of that goes to his predecessor, and now successor, Bob Iger.

Few outside of Disney even heard of Chapek until he made a big splash sticking his nose into politics earlier this year. In March, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the “Parental Rights in Education” bill, a measure that prohibits attempts to sexualize little boys and girls in grades kindergarten through third grade.

Chapek’s initial stance was to stay out of the controversy. But Iger, who had retired, couldn’t resist undercutting the man he handpicked to succeed him.

On February 24, while the bill was being debated—in Florida and around the country—Iger tweeted his opposition to it, siding with President Biden. Our “devout Catholic” president called the attempt to protect children from being sexualized “hateful.” Iger added that the bill “will put vulnerable, young LGBTQ people in jeopardy.”

Less than two weeks later, Chapek folded. On March 7, he pledged his opposition to parental rights. “I want to make it crystal clear: I and the entire leadership team unequivocally stand in support of our LGBTQ+ employees, their families, and their communities.” On March 11, he dug himself in deeper when he apologized to the radicals who pressured him.

It would be a mistake to think that Iger opposes parental rights for business reasons. No, he does so for moral reasons.

On March 31, CNN aired an interview that Iger had taped with Chris Wallace a few weeks earlier.

“A lot of these issues are not necessarily political. It’s about right and wrong.” Similarly, he said, “When you’re dealing with right and wrong or when you’re dealing with something that does have profound impact on your business, I just think you have to do what is right and not worry about the potential backlash to it.”

Iger’s statement could not be more clear. The man who now leads Disney thinks it is morally right for teachers to question kids about whether they are content being a boy or a girl—that is exactly the kind of grooming exercise that DeSantis, and millions of Americans, oppose.

Look for things to deteriorate further, on the moral front, at least.

Chapek’s biggest weakness was in working with the creative team at Disney. One of Iger’s first comments as CEO was to assure that this will be corrected. “It is my intention to restructure things in a way that honors and respects creativity as the heart and soul of who we are.”

By “creativity,” the woke masters at Disney mean such things as women kissing each other in children’s films. That’s why the LGBT crowd pressured executives to include a gay kiss in the movie “Lightyear.” They got what they wanted.

Well, not exactly. Disney did not show the gals kissing in the Middle Eastern and Asian version, electing not to offend Muslim despots and the Communist slavemasters in China. As for religious folks in America who would like to be spared such fare, that’s just too bad—they need to be reeducated.

It’s not just Iger who wants to morally pollute America—it’s Disney’s president Karen Burke. She likes to brag that she has “one transgender child and one pansexual child.” More important, she boasts Disney has “many, many, many LGBTQIA characters.”

Disney won’t stop until parents rebel. While there are some very encouraging signs that parents have had it, there needs to be more resistance to those who want to eroticize children. We need to teach Iger what “right and wrong” should really mean.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the shakeup at Disney:

“Bob [Chapek] is the right leader at the right time for The Walt Disney Company, and the Board has full confidence in him and his leadership team.” That’s what Susan Arnold, chairman of the board, said in June when Chapek was unanimously elected to a three-year term as the Disney CEO.

Last night, Chapek was fired. Arnold wrote, “We thank Bob Chapek for his service to Disney over his long career….”

What went wrong so fast? When the markets closed on Friday, Disney stock had lost 40% of its value this year. Disney’s streaming business lost $1.5 billion in the fourth quarter. Talk of massive layoffs and a hiring freeze have seen employee morale take a nose dive.

Among Chapek’s lousy decisions was his caving into a loud, but small, group of LGBT employees and activists. They wanted to thrust Disney into the culture war head-first by opposing a parental rights bill championed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis; the bill barred teaching kids in kindergarten through third grade about sexuality.

Chapek initially resisted getting involved in this issue because he didn’t think it was good policy for Disney to become a political actor. But he quickly gave in to pressure and apologized for not getting involved.

After Chapek enlisted Disney on the side of the groomers—encouraging kids to question whether they are happy being a boy or girl—he incurred a backlash. Not only did parents condemn what he did, Gov. DeSantis stripped Disney of its special tax status (the company had previously been allowed to function like a municipality).

Chapek held on but his days were numbered. So distraught were Disney executives that they have now brought back Robert Iger for two years. Iger replaced Michael Eisner as CEO in 2005; after Chapek took over in 2020, he remained as chairman through 2021.

The money boys on Wall Street, who care not a fig about Disney’s war on traditional moral values, are cheering Iger’s return. Parents should not.

In 1998, five years into this job as president and CEO of the Catholic League, I locked horns with Iger—it was the first of many battles—when he was president of ABC. [We had recently killed the ABC show, “Nothing Sacred,” by going after the advertisers.] He had just told the National Association of Broadcasters that it was ill-advised to put the Jerry Springer show on TV. “Programs that are embarrassments to our business will, in the long run, alienate our viewers.”

Really? As I pointed out in a letter to the Wall Street Journal right after Iger spoke, ABC had just aired a show, “That’s Life,” that was beyond the pale. Here is part of what I said.

“The show trashed Christ’s crucifixion, the Host, transubstantiation, Holy Water, Catholic prayers, Midnight Mass, salvation, Catholic rituals, the Vatican, the New Testament, the Stations of the Cross, Confession, nuns, priests and laypersons. That it was shown during Holy Week, with specific references to Easter, was all the more incredible.”

In 1995, two years into this job—the same year Disney bought ABC—I held a press conference at the Archdiocese of New York criticizing Disney’s film distributor, Miramax, for making the anti-Catholic movie, “Priest.” Disney’s Miramax, under the tutelage of Harvey and Bob Weinstein, continued to offend Catholics by releasing a slew of bigoted flicks. In more recent times, ABC’s “The O’Neals” and “Family Guy” treated Catholics the way they would never treat LGBT people.

Iger is not content to make children’s fare that services a radical agenda. He has a passion for abortion rights. In 2019, he led Hollywood studios to gang up on Georgia for over newly passed restrictions on abortion. As I pointed out at the time, this was rich. Hollywood goes out of its way to eroticize the culture, sending the wrong signals to young people, and then when promiscuity leads some women to opt for an abortion, Tinseltown just winks.

Iger refuses to connect the dots, except when it comes to smoking. In 2007, he said Disney “will place an anti-smoking PSA [Public Service Announcement] on DVD’s of any future film that does depict smoking.”

In other words, depictions of smoking on the big screen may induce young people to smoke, but depictions of sex have no behavioral consequences. Iger knows better—he can’t have it both ways.

The governing board at Disney did not fire Chapek because he caved into the groomers. They fired him for financial reasons, not cultural ones. They are the real problem, and now they have gone back to the well, dragging up their most ethically challenged hack from the past.

Contact Kristina Schake, executive vice president, Global Communications: Kristina.Schake@disney.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on remarks made by Archbishop Timothy Broglio that have drawn criticism:

Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who heads the Archdiocese for the Military Services, and was just elected president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, spoke at a press conference during the bishops’ conference in Baltimore. He was asked if he stood by a comment he made in 2018 saying, “there is no question that the crisis of sexual abuse by priests in the USA is directly related to homosexuality.” He did not back down from his stance.

What Broglio said is undeniably true. No matter, those who persist in promoting the myth that homosexuality has nothing to do with the sexual abuse of minors are going bonkers.

Kevin Clarke wrote a piece for America magazine saying that a 2011 study by John Jay College of Criminal Justice found that “homosexuality was not a cause of abuse by priests, which researchers argued were crimes of opportunity by pedophiles.”

As I pointed out in The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes, the John Jay researchers did a good job overall, but their one weakness was in taking at face value how accused priests  characterized themselves.

The researchers did not dispute that 81 percent of the victims were male, and that 78 percent of them were postpubescent. Nor did they dispute the fact that when men have sex with men they are engaged in homosexual acts. Their mistake was in saying that homosexuality cannot be considered a cause because many of the homosexual priests who abused adolescents did not identify as gay. To which the proper response is, “So what?”

While self-identity is an interesting subjective phenomenon, it is no substitute for objective reality. The fact is the clergy sexual abuse crisis was caused overwhelmingly by homosexual priests, and attempts to deny this verity are intellectually dishonest.

Clarke is flatly wrong to say that the John Jay study found that the abuse scandal was caused by pedophiles. That is simply not true. They very clearly said just the opposite. On p. 55 of the report he cites, the authors say that 3.8 percent of the abusers were pedophiles. Clarke obviously did not read the report. Either that or he is lying.

Josh McElwee of the National Catholic Reporter claims that “Academic studies have found no [homosexual] relationship.” Wrong. I cite many in my book.

The relationship between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors is not direct, but there is definitely a link. To be sure, being a homosexual does not cause one to abuse anyone. But there is an intervening variable, one that intervenes between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors, and that variable is immaturity. Homosexuals are more likely to be emotionally and sexually immature, and it is that factor that accounts for their overrepresentation among abusers, in and out of the Catholic Church.

Freud knew it, and so do honest behavioral scientists today. Freud attributed homosexuality to “a certain arrest of sexual development.” The John Jay researchers said many accused priests cited their own immaturity as a factor. The reason why these priests are attracted to adolescents is because they are psychologically stunted—their emotional and sexual maturity leveled off when they were young.

Archbishop Broglio was right in 2018 and he is right today. He doesn’t have to walk back anything. It is his uninformed critics who need to do so.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the reaction to Candace Cameron Bure’s defense of Christmas movies:

Candace Cameron Bure wants Christmas movies to feature moms, pops and kids, and for this she is being blasted by homosexual activists and Christian bashers in Hollywood. She has been called a “bigot,” “rude and hurtful.” And apparently she is guilty of the worst sin of them all, for using “tradition as a guise for exclusion.”

All customs and traditions are based on exclusion. In February, we celebrate Black History Month, a time of celebration that excludes everyone who is not black. In March, we celebrate St. Patrick’s Day, a time of celebration that excludes everyone who is not Irish. We just got finished celebrating Veteran’s Day, excluding all non-Veterans.

Isn’t this what diversity is all about?

Christmas is a time to celebrate the birth of Jesus, and it therefore excludes  the celebration of all other religions. Christmastime is also a special time of the year for families, for children, in particular.

Now it is a fact of nature that homosexual acts are incapable of reproduction, and therefore homosexuals are denied the opportunity to naturally create a family. Does that mean that homosexuals cannot celebrate Christmas? Of course not. Celibate priests cannot naturally create a family either, but they certainly celebrate Christmas.

Everyone can celebrate Christmas, but no one has the right to hijack the holiday to promote their own agenda. It’s time gay activists showed more respect for traditional moral values and stopped with the vitriol against  practicing Christians like Candace Cameron Bure.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the possibility of anti-Christmas attacks on campus:

We have previously documented many violent anti-Catholic incidents that have taken place in the wake of the overturning of Roe v. Wade. We have also documented our appeals to the U.S. Attorney General and the FBI to conduct a probe of these crimes. With the Christmas season upon us, we need to do more.

Much of the hostility against Catholics, and Christians in general, is fueled on college campuses. They are the intellectual seedbed of hate speech. It is with this in mind that we are alerting Catholics on campus to beware of acts of bigotry this Christmas season.

To that end, we are emailing over 350 Catholics who are associated with the Cardinal Newman chapters on their campus. These ministries are being asked to contact us in the event they learn of anti-Catholic rhetoric or behavior. We will take it from there.

Cardinal Newman societies are nicely positioned to help us. They are the eyes and ears of practicing Catholics on secular campuses nationwide.

Whether the issue is an anti-Catholic play, or the censoring of Christmas events, we need to know of it at the Catholic League so we can respond with vigor. It is a sad commentary on our society that this needs to be done, but it would be even sadder if our side did nothing about it.

Trust us. We will not be passive.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a priest found not guilty of sexual abuse:

The due process rights of priests have long been a problem, and the latest case to demonstrate this verity proves just how serious the problem is.

In August 2019, an accuser came forward charging Fr. Robert Cedolia, a Pittsburgh priest, with sexual abuse in 1998; the alleged victim was 8-years-old at the time. The priest was accused of fondling the boy twice during a two week period, and both incidents allegedly occurred during the preparatory sessions for the boy’s first Holy Communion. Cedolia denied the accusations.

Cedolia was immediately removed from ministry and told to move off of diocesan property.

The diocesan Independent Review Board then began an investigation. Two years later, the panel found the charges against Cedolia to be without merit. During this period, the accuser never went to the cops.

However, in June 2021, once the diocese found the priest not guilty, the accuser decided to file criminal charges against him.

On November 14, 2022, Cedolia, 71, was found not guilty of all the charges.

One reason why the jury did not find the priest guilty is the fact that he was able to prove that there was only one Communion practice that year. Moreover, a video shows the interaction between the two parties, and it was routine.

In other words, the priest was immediately removed from ministry—before any evidence of wrongdoing—and it took two years before he was cleared by the diocese. Lots of questions remain.

Why did the accuser wait two years before going to the cops? Why did he wait until the diocese rendered its decision? What was he looking to get?  Why did he field an attorney from Texas to do his bidding? Why did he obtain a lawyer before first filing criminal charges against the priest?

If the diocese had found Cedolia guilty, or if the panel was not entirely convinced, one way or the other, the accuser stood to rake in big bucks in a settlement. According to the priest, his accuser came forward only after he learned this could prove to be a cash cow.

“He did it for purposes of leverage—period,” said Cedolia. “End of story.” It’s hard to disagree with that assessment.

Those guilty of sexually abusing minors should have the book thrown at them. But the Catholic Church should not have due process strictures for priests that are any different than those afforded the employees of any other organization. This absurd condition is a result of the Dallas Charter, the reform document issued by the bishops’ conference in 2002.

In my book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse, I recount how this event unfolded, questioning the ethics behind a policy that removes an accused priest from ministry on the basis of a “credible” accusation. As  Father Thomas Guarino, a Seton Hall professor, put it, “almost every accusation is deemed ‘credible’ unless the accused can prove that thirty years ago (and most accusations are from decades long past) he was on a different continent when the alleged abuse occurred.”

It is not a sign of virtue that the Catholic Church treats priests as guilty until proven innocent. It is a sign of injustice.

By the way, Fr. Cedolia has yet to be reinstated. He has to await a verdict by the Vatican.

He must have the fortitude of a martyr and the patience of a saint.