Bill Donohue comments on a petition drive against Bishop Robert Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph:

Approximately 100,000 persons have signed a petition demanding the resignation of Bishop Robert Finn. It’s a phony exercise.

The petition is found on the website of change.org, home to mostly left-wing activists. Anyone can sign it—you don’t have to be Catholic or from Finn’s diocese. For example, almost 7,400 signatures were sent to the diocese, and all but approximately 150 were from outside the area. Of the signatories online, activists from foreign countries have signed. In short, there is no grassroots rebellion against Bishop Finn.

We know who Bishop Finn’s enemies are: the Kansas City Star and the National Catholic Reporter (both are located in Kansas City, Missouri). They are the real source behind this phony petition drive: Both have been beating the drum calling for Finn to resign. It is not child sexual abuse that angers them, it is where it takes place and under whose purview it is.

There has been an ongoing story in the Orthodox Jewish community of rampant child sexual abuse, intimidation of victims, and a refusal to cooperate with the authorities, yet the Star has never covered this issue and the Reporter has largely ignored it (both publications carry national stories, not just local ones).

Similarly, at the Spirit Lake Indian Reservation in North Dakota, child rapists abound and kids are being murdered, yet neither the Star nor the Reporter have anything to say about it. That’s because they are too busy focusing on twisted clergy who take crotch-shot pictures of children fully clothed.

For the past decade, the most important goal of anti-Catholics has been to bring down a bishop. That’s what is behind this petition drive.

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

The editorial, “Speaking the Truth to the Vatican,” sounds so macho, especially coming from the unmanly New York Times. This time the editorial board is informing us that they have found some nuns they actually admire. Naturally, they are the dissident ones.

Though the internal affairs of the Catholic Church are no more the business of the New York Times than it is the business of the Vatican to police the newspaper’s personnel matters (the Vatican would never show such chutzpah), if they are going to stick their nose in, they should at least be accurate.

It is not true that there are no “serious doctrinal problems” or “radical feminist” issues in the ranks of some orders of nuns. Want proof? Just pick up a copy of the National Catholic Reporter where they are celebrated.

It is not true that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious represents most of the 57,000 nuns—only 1,700 pay dues.

It is not true that “much of the Roman Catholic laity has registered outrage” about Vatican inquiries into rogue nuns; most could care less.

It is not true that there is a “pedophilia scandal” in the Catholic Church: there was a homosexual scandal, but its heyday, the mid-60s to the mid-80s, is long gone.

If the Times wants to meet nuns who have never been the subject of Vatican concerns, it should do a story on any one of the orders that comprise the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious; all are loyal daughters of the Church. For that reason alone, though, they are not likely to attract the applause of the Times.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the DUI arrest of Oakland Bishop Salvatore Cordileone, the archbishop-elect of San Francisco:

Bishop Cordileone was stopped at a DUI checkpoint in San Diego last weekend; he was arrested after it was determined that his blood-alcohol level was above the legal limit. He has since apologized.

This won’t be the end of this story, but not because of what happened. What counts is who it happened to. It just so happens that Cordileone holds orthodox Catholic positions on sexuality, the kind of views hated by both secularists and left-wing Catholics. Consider Michael Sean Winters of the dissident weekly, the National Catholic Reporter.

Winters, like a lot of embittered Catholic “progressives,” is obsessed with homosexuality. That is why he was unable to write one paragraph in his screed against Cordileone without mentioning this subject. The context? Winters wants the bishop to “think with greater compassion about the complicated lives we all lead today.” He also wants the bishop to show an “approriate [sic] humility and humanness.” All of this is code for “shut up and leave the culture to us.”

Gay blog sites have also picked up on this theme. Why? San Francisco is a city where men [read: gays] are free to walk around naked in the street in front of women and children. They can even walk into McDonalds totally nude and park themselves next to Ronald McDonald, provided, the law says, they place a towel on their seat (hygiene matters). Next month homosexuals will whip each other in the street and have sex in public at the Folsom Street Fair. This is the city that Cordileone will soon inherit.

Winters, and his ilk, want nothing more than to intimidate Bishop Cordileone. They know he is bright, courageous and faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church. That is why they would like to silence him, especially on sexual issues. We stand with Bishop Cordileone and urge him not to break stride. We are confident he will not.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the news that Timothy Cardinal Dolan will give benediction at the Democratic National Convention (DNC):

Over the past week, Cardinal Dolan has been hammered by liberals for accepting an invitation to give benediction at the Republican National Convention (RNC). Now that he will close both conventions, they look even more foolish. Here’s a sample of what Dolan’s critics have said.

Andrew Sullivan called Dolan “The Republican Party Cardinal.” The Boston Herald’s Margery Eagan called him an “opportunist.” Mike D’Antonio at the Huffington Post accused Dolan of “leading the bishops in a partisan direction.” John Gehring of Faith & Public Life said he was “baptizing the Republican nominee.” Mike O’Loughlin at America accused him of “being a shill for the GOP.” The National Catholic Reporter said Dolan was “playing a dangerous game.” Sarah Posner at Salon said Dolan’s acceptance “solidifies a partisan partnership between the GOP and the Bishops.” Niall O’Dowd at the Irish Voice said his presence “is a dog whistle to all Catholics out there to support the GOP candidates.” And the Los Angeles Times editorialized that Dolan has “placed his imprimatur” on the Republican strategy.

The fundamental difference between Cardinal Dolan and these critics comes down to one thing: he is a man of principle and they don’t know how to spell the word. He invited President Obama to the Al Smith Dinner, knowing he would receive flak from some on the right. Then he agreed to speak at the RNC, knowing he would be blasted by some on the left. Now he has accepted an invitation to speak at the DNC and none of his critics—on both the left and the right—can figure him out.

What this shows is that Cardinal Dolan is able to rise above the politics of the moment. But to those who view the world exclusively through the lens of power, this is completely unintelligible.

The following comment against the Vatican and the bishops, made in response to concerns over the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, is taken from a May 8 editorial in the National Catholic Reporter:

“This is the latest episode of episcopal flailing about in a search for enemies anywhere and everywhere to explain how so much has escaped their control. This isn’t about authentic teaching and orthodoxy. This is about thought control and censorship.” (Our emphasis.)

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:

It is important for the bishops to know that the National Catholic Reporter, which is adored by the Catholic Press Association, regards them to be no better than the totalitarian monsters who have ruled in communist and fascist nations. Hitler, Stalin and Mao perfected thought control, and that is what the bishops are now accused of promoting. Even for the Reporter, this assault represents a new low.

I will make sure that every bishop in the U.S. gets this news release.

Contact Tom Fox: tfox@ncronline.org

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial featured on the website of the National Catholic Reporter (NCR):

It’s been obvious for a long time, but now it is official: the National Catholic Reporter rejects the teachings of the Catholic Church on sexuality. In an editorial titled, “NCR Endorses Call for a New Sexual Ethic,” it supports retired Australian Bishop Geoffrey Robinson’s plea for the Church to change its teachings on sexuality.

Bishop Robinson wrote a book a few years ago called Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church. Here is what the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference said about it in 2010: “Catholics believe that the Church, founded by Christ, is endowed by him with a teaching office which endures through time. This is why the Church’s Magisterium teaches the truth authoritatively in the name of Christ. The book casts doubt upon these teachings. This leads in turn to the questioning of Catholic teaching on, among other things, the nature of Tradition, the inspiration of the Holy Scripture, the infallibility of the Councils and the Pope, the authority of the Creeds, the nature of the ministerial priesthood and central elements of the Church’s moral teachings.”

No wonder Robinson is NCR’s hero. Ten years ago, I said on “Hardball” that neither NCR writer Tom Roberts (he is now the editor-at-large of NCR), nor the weekly newspaper, “believe in anything the Catholic Church says on sexuality” (Roberts was on the show with me). When I continued to talk, Mike Barnicle, who was sitting in for Chris Matthews, jumped in and said, “Wait, Bill, please. Tom, take it up. I mean, you just got whacked across the face.” Roberts replied, “I’m not going to take that up.” But how could he? In short, nothing has changed in the last decade save for NCR making it formal: the Church is wrong on sexuality.

Need any further proof? On p. 21 of the March 30-April 12 edition of NCR it has a full-page ad by the pro-abortion and anti-Catholic group, Catholics for Choice (CFC). It wouldn’t accept a dime from a racist group (nor should it), but it has no problem cashing a check from CFC. It’s time the newspaper changed its name to the National Reporter.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the reaction to Cardinal Timothy Dolan’s letter of March 2 to the bishops:

As the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Cardinal Timothy Dolan outlined last Friday his many concerns about the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) directive mandating that the insurance companies of religious employers pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization. For the most part, his letter has been met with stunning silence.

Dolan made it clear that the bishops will not budge in their demands for religious liberty. Neither the January 20 initial HHS Rule, nor the amended February 10th directive, satisfy religious liberty concerns. He correctly noted that “We’ll still have to pay” under the so-called accommodation provisions.

It was revealing to learn that when members of the USCCB recently met with the White House staff, they were told that the HHS Rule is set in cement. So much for dialogue. Moreover, the Obama staff informed the Catholic officials that they should follow the “enlightened” voices at America magazine (the Jesuits agree with the administration). Dolan was pointed in his criticism: “The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers.”

Catholic News Service never commented on, or posted, Cardinal Dolan’s letter in its “News Stories” section; instead, it relegated it to its blog postings [while there was no CNS story on this issue posted to its website, there was one that was sent to its client list]. The liberal Catholic media—America, Commonweal and the dissident National Catholic Reporter—have gone mute. Dolan’s challenge deserves a response.

The Catholic League commends Cardinal Dolan for telling it like it is. To read the letter that some don’t want you to read, click here.

The announcement on January 20 by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius that religious non-profits will have to cover sterilization and contraceptive services, including some abortion-inducing drugs, is being met with growing rancor. Catholic League president Bill Donohue speaks to this issue today:

Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, responded to the Obama administration’s edict by saying, “Never before has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go into the marketplace and buy a product that violates their conscience.”

Joining him in this assessment is an unlikely ally, namely the editorial board of the Washington Post. Today, the editorial on this subject says that “requiring a religiously affiliated employer to spend its own money in a way that violates its religious principles does not make an adequate accommodation for those deeply held views.”

Michael Sean Winters at the liberal National Catholic Reporter was highly critical of the Obama edict; he even went so far as to say that Obama “lost my vote” as a result of this decision. Some prominent priests and nuns who initially supported Obamacare have also expressed their opposition to this ruling. 

What’s going on? Many of those who tend to side with abortion-rights advocates also hold to the very American principle of respecting conscience rights; when these issues collide, the latter proves decisive.

The Obama administration made a fatal flaw when it assumed that most people are not going to get worked up about healthcare plans that carry contraceptive coverage. If the plans were voluntarily adopted, the administration would be right. But the difference in this instance is that this service is being mandated by the federal government, allowing no exceptions for those who in good conscience cannot go along; the inclusion of abortifacients in the policy only deepens the problem.

There is a high price paid for arrogance in politics. Stay tuned—this issue isn’t going to go away.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue stands with Saint Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt in his support for a state constitutional amendment on marriage:

The reason why Minnesotans will vote next year on the issue of a constitutional amendment affirming marriage, traditionally understood, is due to attempts to reconfigure this ancient social institution. For example, people excluded by nature from procreating are currently demanding the right to marry, winning sympathy in some courts. Catholics are being rallied by Archbishop John Nienstedt to support the marriage amendment partly because some of those on the other side, e.g., “Catholics for Marriage Equality MN,” are falsely promoting themselves as representing an authentic Catholic position.

Critics of the Church’s position on marriage are saying that Archbishop Nienstedt is being “divisive,” and does not represent what Catholics want; others are literally going off the rails.

All bishops are called to lead, not follow. Moreover, the latest survey of Catholics published in the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) shows more support for Church teachings on same-sex marriage than on the death penalty. The bishops are opposed to both (though proscriptions against the death penalty are not absolute), yet this hasn’t persuaded the gay marriage advocates to demand that the bishops ratify the pro-death penalty sentiments of the rank-and-file.

Not surprisingly, NCR recently published a piece by the former head of Catholic Charities in San Francisco calling bishops who uphold the Church’s teachings on marriage “villains”; he accused them of promoting “an atmosphere of ignorance and hate.” If they—and this includes NCR’s editors—really believe this to be true, then it’s time to do the manly thing and get out. Finally, it is ironic that “Rainbow Sash” says Archbishop Nienstedt is guilty of abusing his authority—its members are known for such fascistic exercises as disrupting Mass at Communion.