Monday, July 29, 2013

Goliath Bill Donohue, Catholic League, Bishop Myers’ tactics to suppress freedom of speech in the USA

Updated March 4, 2014

Read our new blog:  Pope Francis the CON Christ. Pretender & Impostor of Jesus. Merlin hoax CANNOT CLONE JESUS or dogs

Our latest  related article about New Jersey "Bling"  Bishop Myers

Updated December 13, 2013

A former altar boy sues Goliath-bully Bill Donohue and Catholic League for defamation and invasion of privacy

At last, a victim (of a pedophile priest), Jon David Couzens has filed a lawsuit against Goliath-bully Bill Donohue for defamation and invasion of privacy. According to The Kansas City Star: The lawsuit, filed Friday in Jackson County Circuit Court, alleges that Donohue published false statements about Couzens in news releases, on the Catholic League’s website and in documents distributed to churches. In those statements, Donohue said that Couzens had been involved in a botched drug deal and implicated in a murder. “It’s a very sad thing that William Donohue and the Catholic League are attacking those who the priesthood has already abused,” Couzens said in a statement. “I now understand why other victims don’t come forward. The things said about me are so cruel and offensive they cut to the core of my being.  Everybody knows that Goliath-bully Bill Donohue thrives in being cruel and offensive and in ‘cutting to the core of beings’ especially of victims of the JP2 Army – John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army of Biblical Proportions.  His $500,000 salary a year and $26 million dollar Catholic League pay him to do just that - to rub salt on victims wounds and to stab his Catholic League sword deep into the core of victims’ souls and shred their reputations when they are already suffering a “living Hell” -- thanks to John Paul II “the Great” Patron Saint of Pedophiles, Pederast and Rapists Priests!     

Read our related article - John Paul II the Holy Father of Lies! Cardinal Dziwisz book: “JPII knew nothing” about bestial pedophile priest Fr. Maciel is Vatican Titanic Deceits

It’s about time someone brings Goliath-bully Bill Donohue to court and send him to jail for his rampant lies and ruthless bullying especially towards victims whose lives have already been ruined by the JP2 Army- John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army- named after Bill Donohue’s favorite fastest tracking Catholic saint pope who said nothing and did nothing to save and protect children during his longest tenure 27 years as the world trotting John Paul II “the Great” -- Great Narcissus, that is, red more here

 It’s not surprising what false releases Goliath-bully Bill is so capable of publishing in the Catholic League because his Catholic faith is also false.  Another David boy should throw a stone on Bill Donohue’s head and tell him on the face – that those popes and priests cannot clone cats and dogs and therefore they cannot clone Christ either!   Bill Donohue’s Vatican Catholic Pope Idol Pope Francis may be wearing black shoes but he is using the poor and little children for his PR stunt for his narcissistic popularity to try to salvage the Vatican Titanic sunken deep in the ocean of moral bankruptcy.  

Pope Francis is using photo-ops with children and the poor to perpetually oppress the poor! 

The truth is, Pope Francis is made of the same white cloth as Benedict XVI-Ratzinger, the Vatican Last Tsar who wore red shoes and said Mass in Latin -- to impersonate Christ (who never wore white robes, never spoke Latin, and most of all never lived in a Vatican Palace surrounded by a Swiss Army). Not only do the double Popes impersonate Christ – imposters – but they also claim to be -- cloners -- to have the supernatural powers to clone the “actual” flesh and blood of Christ in the instant magic of the Eucharist. 

When will 1.2 billion Catholics wake up to the reality that Cardinals, Bishops and priests cannot clone cats and dogs - and therefore they cannot clone God or Christ either?  Hello Catholic women!  It takes you 9 months to carry a fetus full term to make a human baby, changes in your hormonal balance, et cetera, and you are kneeling down to eat - the 9-seconds cloned flesh of Christ?  - before those immoral popes and Catholic priests who con you that they can clone Christ the Son of God in 9 seconds of the transubstantiation formula of the “Consecration” of the Eucharist -- but Mary the purest Immaculate Conception had to carry Jesus full term? 

 The Sorcery of the Eucharist is sheer Vatican Holy Shit!  And every time you, women, kneel down to receive the false flesh of Christ, you perpetuate the Vatican Concordats and perpetuate the oppression of your fellow poor women, poor children and poor countries! Read here 

Abolition of Vatican Concordat in Dominican Republic and bring pedophile Papal Nuncio and other pedophile Polish priests to justice

Read our related articles:

7 acts Australia must do for humanity’s good motivated by the Victorian Inquiry that slams the Vatican (Roman) Catholic Church! 

 Francis updates: John Allen and Vatican Pied Pipers toot Francis-mania…while Hans Kung points out “the Pope and his ‘double’” shadow pope Ratzinger!

BOYCOTT Oratory of Saint Joseph! Montreal: Second class-action suit targets Congrégation de Ste-Croix! Saints and Holy Cross cannot protect children!

Abolition of Vatican Concordat in Dominican Republic and bring pedophile Papal Nuncio and other pedophile Polish priests tojustice 

Middle Ages Vatican condemns New Age American Nuns: The Celestine Prophecy come true! Sisters in Crisis book mocks LCWR Sisters in Christ

Reference about the “neutrality of the state and the equality of all men and women”,

 The Hague is above Pope, Vatican, Religion. The Hague must prosecute Benedict XVI now to prove secular International Justice reigns over ALL Religions and Despots  

  Pope Francis Top 10 Vatican Deceits. Francis cloned @3.13.13 inside Vatican Titanic as Jesuit Mask of Vatican Evils. “Bergoglio. Basura. Vos sos la dictadura.”   

Argo &“saint” John Paul II are make-believe legends of Hollywood and the Vatican, the twin cities that “lie for a living”

Vatican bank Bishop∕accountant caught money laundering €20M and it surpasses the Da Vinci Code intrigue. Vatican greedy Mammon never sleeps and never stops

UN commands Vatican to reveal cover-ups/info… like Milwaukee pedophile priests files & Cardinal Dolan’s role

OC Diocese buys Crystal Cathedral as flesh-factory of Christ... for wealthy God-flesh-eating Catholics

Pope Francis Top 10 Vatican Deceits. Francis cloned @3.13.13 inside Vatican Titanic as Jesuit Mask of Vatican Evils. “Bergoglio. Basura. Vos sos la dictadura”.

The Kansas City Star
December 9
The Kansas City Star

A former altar boy whose case prompted a wrongful-death lawsuit against the Kansas City-St. Joseph Diocese that resulted in a $2.25 million settlement is suing a national Catholic organization, alleging defamation and invasion of privacy.

Jon David Couzens filed the lawsuit against the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights; its president and CEO, Bill Donohue; the KC Catholic League; and two Kansas City men who were officers of the now-dissolved local organization.

The lawsuit, filed Friday in Jackson County Circuit Court, alleges that Donohue published false statements about Couzens in news releases, on the Catholic League’s website and in documents distributed to churches. In those statements, Donohue said that Couzens had been involved in a botched drug deal and implicated in a murder.

“It’s a very sad thing that William Donohue and the Catholic League are attacking those who the priesthood has already abused,” Couzens said in a statement. “I now understand why other victims don’t come forward. The things said about me are so cruel and offensive they cut to the core of my being.

Goliath-bully Bill Donohue operates like the Dark Ages for the King Pope

Goliath-bully Bill Donohue operates like in the Dark Ages when Kings and their stupid whims were the law of the land and anyone criticizing the King was punished, beheaded, tortured, imprisoned or banished from the kingdom which is why The Borgias, Pope Crimes and Vatican Evils always got away scot-free for centuries.  Imagine if today, Americans criticizing President Obama would be jailed or banished from the US, where would these critics go to live?  We wouldn’t have our late night talk shows such as Jon Stewart, Jay Leno, David Letterman, etc. Yet, today, any American criticizing the Pope or the Vatican is punished, ridiculed, berated, and tortured like Opus Dei Bishop Myers of New Jersey condemning freedom of speech of the media as “evil” because they published his questionable chain of erroneous actions and fallible judgements.  Papal critics are also excommunicated or “silenced” (a form of beheading and banishment) like Jon Sobrino was silenced and Jacques Dupuis was excommunicated.  Or Benedict silenced Tony Flannery   

Today the Catholic League is suppressing the freedom of speech of Americans and the Charter of Rights, and stupid American Catholics are like docile lambs following Donohue to the slaughter house of silence and blind robotic obedience.  It is obvious that anyone criticizing the Pope and the Vatican is branded by Goliath-bully Bill Donohue as “dissident, notorious, disobedient, evil, anti-Catholic (card) bigot, far-left”, name it, he and his associates in the Catholic League, the Vatican Deceit Pied Pipers Empire, such as the LifeSite News, The MediaReport, John L. Allen Jr. can conjure up the cleverest synonyms that makes Satan’s vocabulary in the Garden of Eden very elementary, read our related article 

But there is one Catholic, one American woman that Goliath-bully Bill Donohue does not dare to touch or speak against, that’s Melinda Gates and her 200 million dollars contribution to free distribution of condoms and contraceptives to women around the world which is against Vatican doctrine and against Papal decree, read our related article here -- Melinda Gates versus Benedict XVI: who’s more “like Christ”? Melinda Gates saves lives of 200 million women while Benedict XVI sits in out-of-touch-with-reality Vatican Throne 
  Goliath-bully Bill Donohue has fought media giants like Jon Stewart, Disney, Wal-Mart, The New York Times (which ironically was his ally in the 1990’s)  but he does not dare fight the billionaire Melinda Gates.  That’s because he knows, and his Opus Dei bosses know too, that if the Vatican dare touch or excommunicate Melinda Gates, majority of women (they are the majority of church-goers) would leave in droves the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Kingdom would be crippled to its knees (without female slaves-worshippers) and the monarch Pope would reign before an empty (ludicrous) kingdom…and the Holy See would see nothing except the Gay Lobby (busy with sodomy orgies) at the Vatican!  So the Vatican pick-on and bully the (weaker and poorer women than Melinda Gates) American nuns instead.  Read our related article:  Vatican attacks American nuns

For those who need to know and understand how Bill Donohue operates as the Catholic Goliath-bully with his army the Catholic League, there are three must-read chosen articles below (with our highlights and emphases):  (1) “How Religion’s Demand for Obedience Keeps Us in the Dark Ages”, (2) “The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights: Neither Religious nor Civil”, (3) “The Catholic League and Suppression of the Press Today”.  These are the most comprehensive articles ever written about him by scholars and they reveal thorough analyses of Bill Donohue and his Modus Operandi and single mission: suppression of all mainstream media criticism of the Roman Catholic Church.  The Catholic League’s commitment is to canon 1369 of the Code of Canon Law: “A person is to be punished with a just penalty, who, at a public event or assembly, or in a published writing, or by otherwise using the means of social communication, utters blasphemy, or gravely harms public morals, or rails at or excites hatred of or contempt for religion or the Church.”   Canon law is the law of the Catholic Church. All criticism of the pope or the Church is in violation of this law in one way or another. Bill Donohue is acting as in the Dark Ages wherein anyone criticising the King is either beheaded, tortured or banished from the kingdom, and he is the King’s henchman!  Today, anyone criticising the Popes or the Vatican is both tortured by the Catholic League in the media and branded as “bigot, dissident, rebellious, controversy, and anti-Catholic” – like the article below about “Dissident anti-Catholic National Catholic Reporter gets $2.3 million grant to cover LCWR controversy”. Or the papal critic is simply excommunicated like this old Jesuit priest who criticised Benedict XVI’s book Jesus of Nazareth, read our related article -- Benedict XVI the Vatican Last Tsar: Final despotic acts. Vatican jails worldwide locations

In New Jersey, Opus Dei Bishop Myers is doing the same thing (as Goliath-bully Bill Donohue) by attacking and bullying the media and condemning his critics as “evil” because this is the Opus Dei Modus Operandi -– no one (has the right) and no one can criticize the Popes, the Cardinals and the Bishops…or they are ‘evil’ and all will go to Hell. Period.  To the Opus Dei, the Popes and the male-only hierarchy of the Vatican are “the voice of the Will of God” and this is explained very well in the article “How Religion’s Demand for Obedience Keeps Us in the Dark Ages”.   Opus Dei is archaic like its founder, (false saint) Josemaria Escriva and all members are spiritually narrow-minded and intolerant; they are the only the ones who are “right” and all non-followers and non-members (of Opus Dei) are wrong and they will go to Hell.  But look at who’s talking?  Look at the 27 years Opus Dei papacy of John Paul II that left a “living hell” on hundreds of thousands of boys who were raped by the JP2 Army – John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army – orchestrated and covered-up by Opus Dei’s Dr. Joaquin Navarro-Valls, the official controller and precursor mouth of John Paul II “the Great”, read our related article on why Opus Dei Bishop Finn must resign .   Likewise, Opus Dei Myers also must resign because this will be one of the biggest slap on Opus Dei's face, Opus Dei who had neither compunction nor compassion for hundreds of thousands of children sexually abused by the JP2 Army - John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army

The Jesuits founded the Catholic League

Does SNAP or anyone know that the (Dark Ages) Catholic League was founded by a Jesuit, Virgil Blum, in 1973 in Marquette University?  He established it well for 20 years, until Bill Donohue came along in 1993 and until now 2013, that’s also 20 years.  The Jesuits run many universities and they do a lot of good… but the other hand, or the other side of the Jesuitical scale, there are Jesuits who do evil - which tips the scale towards the much lower side of evil. It was the first Jesuit Cardinal Bellarmine who handed to Galileo his condemnation from the Vatican - that his scientific idea that the earth revolve around the sun contradicts the Bible and Theology and the infallibility of the Pope, read our related article here -- Vatican Terror on Galileo, priests and the poor, women and children 
  Jesuits are the greatest deceivers on Earth that is why Pope Francis is the Jesuit Mask of all Vatican Deceits, read our related article,  Pope Francis Top 10 Vatican Deceits. Francis cloned @3.13.13 inside Vatican Titanic as Jesuit Mask of Vatican Evils. “Bergoglio. Basura. Vos sos la dictadura.”

Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, wrote that believers should “always be ready to obey [the church] with mind and heart, setting aside all judgment of one’s own.” This is the biggest irony of the Jesuits, because if we look at all the 28 Jesuit universities in the USA or 144 in the world, they all aim to sharpen and educate and enlighten the judgment of their students!!

To explain just how absolute he thought this obedience should be, he used a vivid analogy:  “That we may be altogether of the same mind and in conformity with the Church herself, if she shall have defined anything to be black which to our eyes appears to be white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be black.  And this Ignatian and Jesuit statement has caused - and justified - more Pope Crimes and Vatican Evils than ever…

Catholic League suppression of mainstream media and freedom of speech

Catholic Goliath does not bother with our blogs because we fall in the “fringe” group category.   He said: “I think it is a gross mistake to give elevation to fringe groups. Our basic rule of thumb is this: the more mainstream the source of anti-Catholicism, the more likely it is that the Catholic League will respond….The mainstream media, after all, have the credibility and influence that the fringe lacks, and they are therefore much more likely to do real damage.” 

When major universities, TV networks and government officials engage in Catholic-baiting, it is a far more dangerous situation than the venom that emanates from certifiably fringe organizations.”
In the event the anti-Catholic bigots want to bite the bullet and stay the course, we’ll do everything we can within the law to make sure that they pay a very high price for doing so.”[260pp15] It goes without saying that anyone critical of the Vatican, or the hierarchy, or the Roman Catholic Church is, by definition, an anti-Catholic bigot—including Catholics themselves.

One final element makes clear the objective of the Catholic League—protection of the papacy against all criticism. Writes Donohue, “It is the conviction of the Catholic League that an attack on the Church is an attack on Catholics.”

“I defy anyone to name a single organization that has more rabid members than the Catholic League. Our members are generous, loyal and extremely active. When we ask them to sign petitions, write to offending parties and the like, they respond with a vigor that is unparalleled…We aim to win. Obviously, we don’t win them all, but our record of victories is impressive.”

Dave Pierre of NewsBusters is an arm of the Catholic League and you can tell by the words he uses.  Dave Pierre is NewsBusters' resident apologist for the sexual abuse conducted by Catholic Church priests, even going so far as to claim that one bishop's paying off abusive priests rather than subjecting them to the criminal justice system was "fast and economical."… Pierre then turns his venom on David Clohessy, head of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, calling him "nasty" and a "bigot." (See article below)

Catholic League is defeated -- in California - House Assembly voted for SB 131
Obviously, Bill Donohue and the Catholic League did not win last Wednesday when the California  Assembly voted  for SB 131 , and he then wrote that the victory was due to the “Democrats",  read our related article:  California Assembly Appropriations Committee,voteD YES to SB 131 !!! Contact/ Write to members of the House Appropriations Committee - let them know you support the bill!


Articles and news for August 24, 2013

How Religion’s Demand for Obedience Keeps Us in the Dark Ages

The most fervent advocates of religion in the modern world are also the most deeply inculcated with the mindset of command and obedience, which has dangerous consequences.

By Adam Lee | 19 March 2012

For the vast majority of human history, the only form of government was the few ruling over the many. As human societies became settled and stratified, tribal chiefs and conquering warlords rose to become kings, pharaohs and emperors, all ruling with absolute power and passing on their thrones to their children. To justify this obvious inequality and explain why they should reign over everyone else, most of these ancient rulers claimed that the gods had chosen them, and priesthoods and holy books obligingly came on the scene to promote and defend the theory of divine right.

It’s true that religion has often served to unite people against tyranny, as well as to justify it. But in many cases, when a religious rebellion overcame a tyrant, it was only to install a different tyrant whose beliefs matched those of the revolutionaries. Christians were at first ruthlessly persecuted by the Roman Empire, but when they ascended to power, they in turn banned all the pagan religions that had previously persecuted them. Protestant reformers like John Calvin broke away from the decrees of the Pope, but Calvinists created their own theocratic city-states where their will would reign supreme.

Similarly, when King Henry VIII split England away from the Catholic church, it wasn’t so he could create a utopia of religious liberty; it was so he could create a theocracy where his preferred beliefs, rather than the Vatican’s, would be the law of the land. And in just the same way, when the Puritans fled England and migrated to the New World, it wasn’t to uphold religious tolerance; it was to impose their beliefs, rather than the Church of England’s.

It’s only within the last few centuries, in the era of the Enlightenment, that a few fearless thinkers argued that the people should govern themselves, that society should be steered by the democratic will rather than the whims of an absolute ruler. The kings and emperors battled ferociously to stamp this idea out, but it took root and spread in spite of them. In historical terms, democracy is a young idea, and human civilization is still reverberating from it — as we see in autocratic Arab societies convulsed with revolution, or Chinese citizens rising up against the state, or even in America, with protesters marching in the streets against a resurgence of oligarchy.

But while the secular arguments for dictatorship have been greatly weakened, the religious arguments for it have scarcely changed at all. Religion is very much a holdover from the dark ages of the past, and the world’s holy books still enshrine the ancient demands for us to bow down and obey the (conveniently unseen and absent) gods (like the invisible flesh of Christ in the Host of the Eucharist), and more importantly, the human beings who claim the right to act as their representatives. It’s no surprise, then, that the most fervent advocates of religion in the modern world are also the most deeply inculcated with this mindset of command and obedience.

We saw this vividly in recent weeks with the controversy over birth control. As polls and surveys make clear, the overwhelming majority of American Catholics use contraception and in all other ways live normal, modern lives. They mostly just ignore the archaic bluster of the bishops. But the Pope and the Vatican hierarchy conduct themselves publicly as if nothing had changed since the Middle Ages; as if there were billions of Catholics who’d leap to obey the slightest crook of their finger.

The attitude the Vatican displays toward Catholic laypeople is perfectly summed up in a papal encyclical from 1906, titled “Vehementer Nos”:

The Scripture teaches us, and the tradition of the Fathers confirms the teaching, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, ruled by the Pastors and Doctors — a society of men containing within its own fold chiefs who have full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging. It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of persons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors.
An even more breathtakingly arrogant expression of this idea comes from New Advent, the official Catholic theological encyclopedia. Watch how it addresses that whole embarrassing Galileo episode:

[I]n the Catholic system internal assent is sometimes demanded, under pain of grievous sin, to doctrinal decisions that do not profess to be infallible…. [but] the assent to be given in such cases is recognized as being not irrevocable and irreversible, like the assent required in the case of definitive and infallible teaching, but merely provisional…To take a particular example, if Galileo who happened to be right while the ecclesiastical tribunal which condemned him was wrong, had really possessed convincing scientific evidence in favour of the heliocentric theory, he would have been justified in refusing his internal assent to the opposite theory, provided that in doing so he observed with thorough loyalty all the conditions involved in the duty of external obedience.

To translate the church’s legalisms into plain language, what this is saying is that it’s OK to doubt something the church teaches, but only if you keep quiet about that doubt and outwardly obey everything the church authorities tell you, acting as if your doubt didn’t exist. And if the church teaches that something is an infallible article of faith, even that ineffective option is taken away: you’re required to believe it without question or else face eternal damnation.

Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, wrote that believers should “always be ready to obey [the church] with mind and heart, setting aside all judgment of one’s own.” To explain just how absolute he thought this obedience should be, he used a vivid analogy:

That we may be altogether of the same mind and in conformity with the Church herself, if she shall have defined anything to be black which to our eyes appears to be white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be black.

Nor is it just from the Catholic side of the aisle where we hear these pronouncements. Even though Protestants don’t have one pope to rule them all, they still believe that following your betters is essential. Here’s a statement to that effect from the esteemed apologist C.S. Lewis, from his book The Problem of Pain:

But in addition to the content, the mere obeying is also intrinsically good, for, in obeying, a rational creature consciously enacts its creaturely role, reverses the act by which we fell, treads Adam’s dance backward, and returns.

According to Lewis, obedience is “intrinsically good.” In other words, it’s always a good thing to do as you’re told, no matter what you’re being told to do or who’s telling you to do it! It doesn’t take much imagination to picture the moral atrocities that could result from putting this idea into practice.
Another influential Christian writer and one of the intellectual fathers of the modern religious right, Francis Schaeffer, put the same thought — the same demand for mental slavery — in even blunter terms:
I am false or confused if I sing about Christ’s Lordship and contrive to retain areas of my own life that are autonomous. This is true if it is my sexual life that is autonomous, but it is at least equally true if it is my intellectual life that is autonomous — or even my intellectual life in a highly selective area. Any autonomy is wrong.

Just to prove that none of these are flukes, here’s one more quote, this time from Christian evangelical pastor Ray Stedman, excerpted from his sermon titled “Bringing Thoughts Into Captivity”:

I have noticed through the years that the intellectual life is often the last part of a Christian to be yielded to the right of Jesus Christ to rule. Somehow we love to retain some area of our intellect, of our thought-life, reserved from the control of Jesus Christ. For instance, we reserve the right to judge Scripture, as to what we will or will not agree with, what we will or will not accept… [Disagreeing with any part of the Bible] represents a struggle with the Lordship of Christ; his right to rule over every area of life, his right to control the thought-life, every thought taken captive to obey him.

Nor is the demand for mindless obedience confined to Christianity. Here’s how one Jewish rabbi explained the rationale for the kosher dietary laws, recounted in Richard Dawkins’ essay “Viruses of the Mind”:
That most of the Kashrut laws are divine ordinances without reason given is 100 percent the point. It is very easy not to murder people. Very easy. It is a little bit harder not to steal because one is tempted occasionally. So that is no great proof that I believe in God or am fulfilling His will. But, if He tells me not to have a cup of coffee with milk in it with my mincemeat and peas at lunchtime, that is a test. The only reason I am doing that is because I have been told to so do. It is something difficult.

In other words, the kosher laws have no reason or justification, and that’s a good thing, because they teach people the habit of unquestioning obedience, which should be encouraged. This uncannily resembles a piece of parenting advice from Stephen Colbert, who satirically wrote that “Arbitrary rules teach kids discipline: If every rule made sense, they wouldn’t be learning respect for authority, they’d be learning logic.” Religious authorities like this rabbi are making the exact same argument in all seriousness! And then, of course, there’s Islam, whose very name is Arabic for “submission.”

The social scientist Jonathan Haidt has identified what he calls the five foundations of morality: harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, in-group/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. Surveys from all over the world find that self-identified conservatives put far more emphasis on the last three, two of which are fundamental to a worldview based on obedience and submission. The implied similarity between conservatism and fundamentalist religion is too obvious to ignore, particularly in America, where the conservative political party is dominated by an especially regressive and belligerent strain of evangelical Christianity.

And like political conservatism in general, many religious rules are actively destructive to human liberty and happiness. Christian church leaders claim we should prohibit same-sex marriage and abortion and restrict access to birth control; ultra-Orthodox Jewish zealots want to erase women from public life; Islamic theocracies want to make it illegal to criticize or dissent from their beliefs. If moral commands could only be backed up by appeals to reason or human good, these unfounded and harmful laws would vanish overnight. Instead, the people who make these rules and want us to obey them claim that they’re messengers of the will of God, and thus no further justification is needed. It bears emphasizing that this is the exact same argument made by ancient monarchs and tyrants, all of whom used this idea to justify atrocious cruelty.

Those ancient monarchs were toppled because they proved, despite their lofty claims of divine right, that they were no better or wiser or more suited to rule than any other human being. This is a lesson from history that deserves wider attention in the modern world. Like them, religious conservatives claim that they’re passing along God’s ideas, and thus that we should obey them without critical challenge and questioning. This idea has always had disastrous consequences in the past — why should we expect anything different this time?

In sharp contrast to the religious and conservative worldview of obedience and submission, the worldview of freethinkers and progressives at its best is one that exalts freedom and liberty — freedom to make our own choices, freedom of the mind to travel and explore wherever it will. These are our commandments: Think for yourself and don’t blindly bow down to the claims of another. Exercise your own best judgment. Ask questions and investigate whether what you’ve been taught is true. There have been countless wars and devastations because people were too eager to subordinate their will and conscience to the ruling authorities, but as Sam Harris says, no atrocity was ever committed because people were being too reasonable, too skeptical, or too independently minded. If anything, human beings have always been too eager to obey and to subordinate their will to others. The more we throw off that ancient and limiting mindset, the more freedom we have to think, act and speak as we choose, the more humanity as a whole will prosper.


The Dark Ages Sorcery of the Flesh of Christ:  how the Vatican and Catholic Church make Popes and priests – like gods – HOUDINI POPES and MERLIN PRIESTS  -- who can clone and re-create God’s flesh in the Eucharist

The black belt means she is pregnant.
The womb of the Immaculate Conception of Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe carried Jesus this way


9-months gestation of Jesus the Son of God


The cloning process that produced Dolly



1-MINUTE black magic of the cloning of Christ by sinful Vatican pope and priests


Pope Francis, all Popes, Cardinals, Bishops and priests cannot clone cats and dogs and therefore they cannot clone Christ either.  

MERLIN the Magician of King Arthur


1-MINUTE  black magic of the cloning of Christ by sinful Vatican pope and priests 

Transubstantiation or the Mass is a recent development . St. Peter and St. Paul and the Apostles never celebrated Mass and never “transubstantiation” the bread into the flesh of Christ, what they did was to preach about Christ. The Mass was a slow development from the 12th century through various liturgical reforms until the 20th century. It was only in 1215 at the Fourth Council of the Lateran that the Mass began to take form and in 1551 at the Council of Trent that transubstantiation became what it is today.

The Vatican has come to use it as its main crux of power on earth deceiving Catholics and peoples of all faiths that only Popes and men-priests have the exclusive power to transubstantiate - or clone - God’s flesh. Because of the Mass, the Vatican has gotten away with all kinds of heinous crimes, e.g. the Crusades, the Inquisition, the burning of women and witches “For the sake of the Eucharist” and because of the shortage of priests, John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger-Benedict XVI, the Opus Dei who controls the Vatican, the Cardinals and Bishops shuffled pedophile priests from one parish to another. The rest is history: the John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army committed Holy ES Eucharist-and-Sodomy of Biblical proportions see the John Paul II Millstone

In the name of Hail Mary, we dare challenge and defy the Magisterium: No words pronounced by any finite-man can create an infinite-God! No words of the Pope and priests can re-create or re-incarnate Christ’s flesh. The words of sinful popes and priests are powerless and can never re-create or clone God! Only Mary the Immaculate Conception deserved to bear God in her womb. No evil pope and evil priests is worthy to touch and hold God in their evil hands. The words of popes and Cardinals, Bishops and priests are mere clashing-cymbals of St. Paul see John Paul II the Great clashing cymbal of St. Paul

See Benedict XVI to beatify John Paul II is “brought to nothing” by St. Paul

No matter how we look at it, finite-man cannot create an infinite-God. Man can never create God’s flesh. Not in in-vitro fertilization of the scientific laboratories. Not in the sacred altars of holy Roman Catholic churches which by the way were the same pedophile altars of the John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army See the John Paul II Millstone

Rome, call us heretics and we don’t care because in Boston and in America, we have freedom of speech. It was our freedom of speech that got rid of criminal-Cardinal Bernard Law and sent him packing out of our sight and out of our land. But only you, Rome, you the Roman Catholic Church a.k.a. Magisterium would glorify criminals like Cardinal Bernard Law and John Paul II. No other American state has been able to replicate our courage as Bostonians who got rid of the first Cardinal caught guilty of the John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army in America. Yes, we caught the first SS officer of the Third Reich of the Roman Catholic Church … but he went into glorious exile in Rome because only in the Catholic Church are criminals glorified See The John Paul II Millstone John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army expands into Ireland &John Paul is elevated as "Venerable"... only in the Catholic Church are criminals glorified

Benedict XVI, from the Chair of Peter, thinks his papal letter will heal the victims and solve the problem of clergy abuse in Ireland. The fact is, Benedict XVI’s words are powerless. NO POPE has ever healed anyone. As this picture shows,




They came sick and they left sick.

There is NO "Apostolic" authority or succession here,

for NO Pope has EVER been able to heal like Peter or Paul did.

Opus Dei Goliath-bully Bill want to propagate Catholic Medieval Doctrine that all crimes of JP2 Army of pedophile priests are already forgiven and forgotten under the Sacrament of Confession that protects criminals and persecutes their victims, read here

Vatican bank Bishop∕accountant caught money laundering €20M and it surpasses the Da Vinci Code intrigue. Vatican greedy Mammon never sleeps and never stops

The Vatican and Rome are no longer synonymous.

The Vatican Catholics, not Roman Catholics.

The Vatican and Rome are no longer synonymous.

The Pope has no authority in Rome.

The Pope is not Roman. Catholics are not Roman.

The Pope has no power in Rome.

The Vatican is not part of Rome.

The Pope is not a citizen of Rome.

The allegiance of Catholics is to the Pope and the Vatican or the Magisterium… 
The allegiance of Catholics is NOT to Rome; therefore, it is fallacious to call them “Roman Catholics”.

Vatican Last Tsar Benedict XVI and Pope Francis has no papal authority over Rome; therefore, Catholics are not Roman. 

The Vatican must start paying taxes for its staggering business properties in Rome starting in 2013. To keep calling them as “Roman Catholics” is to keep feeding the voracious Vatican Mammon, read here .

The Pope and the Vatican have no political authority and no influence in Rome or in Italian Parliament.

The false (old) statement is, Catholics are “Roman Catholics” of the “Roman Catholic Church”.

The true (new) statement is, Catholics are “Vatican Catholics” of the “Vatican Catholic Church”.

The Pope and the Vatican have no political authority and no influence in Rome or in Italian Parliament.

The false (old) statement is, Catholics are “Roman Catholics” of the “Roman Catholic Church”.

The true (new) statement is, Catholics are “Vatican Catholics” of the “Vatican Catholic Church”.

But the Vatican cling-on to Rome and use its Roman Coliseum to latch-on to the fame of the gladiators and the Hail Caesars as the Pope copy-cat the powers of Caesars which Forbes described Benedict XVI as the 5th Most Powerful Person in the world, read here Forbes delusion of Vatican Last Tsar Benedict XVI powers


      Read our related article, Rosary could not defeat JP2 Army John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army in the 20th Century ... unlike the Battle of Lepanto in the 16th Century 






Red Cross

Doctors without Borders

100 Huntley Street daily TV

Joel Osteen

Kenneth Copeland Ministries

Life Today

Dr. David Jeremiah

Christ like oxygen is free, available and equal to all – reference Quebec Charter of Values

Jesus is greater than religion

Jesus > Religion
Crossroads Christian Communications
Tuesday, October 29th, 2013 - Program #hunt-9489

Jefferson Bethke
In Jesus > Religion, Bethke unpacks similar contrasts that he drew in Spoken Word that went viral on Youtube. In his new book, Bethke highlights the differences between teeth gritting and grace, law and love, performance and peace, despair and hope. With refreshing candor he delves into the motivation behind his message, beginning with the unvarnished tale of his own plunge from the pinnacle of a works-based, fake-smile existence that sapped his strength and led him down a path of destructive behavior. Bethke is quick to acknowledge that he
s not a pastor or theologian, but simply a regular, twenty-something who cried out for a life greater than the one for which he had settled. Along his journey, Bethke discoveredthe real Jesus, who beckoned him beyond the props of false

Oratory of SaintJoseph pedophile priests! Montreal: Second class-action suit targets Congrégation de Ste-Croix! Saints and Holy Cross cannot protect children!

 Zeus:  supreme authority on earth and on Mount Olympus
I am Zeus the supreme god of the Olympians. 



I am the Holy Father of Jesus, Son of God.


Enabler of Pedophile Priests

St. Joseph with candles in the Votive Chapel of the Oratory of St. Joseph

Giant Saint Joseph could NOT help young students victims! His giant statue is only a few nearby the College Notre DAme where hundreds of students were sodomized by Holy Cross Brothers of Saint brother Andre. These 2 saints SAID NOTHING and DID NOTHING TO PROTECT CHILDREN

Oratory candles could not stop CSC pedophiles and bestial lust for 50 years from 1950 to 2001. 

Give your money to the homeless shelters of Montreal

Stop lighting candles! God does not need candles. 

The poor need to eat. The homeless need a shelter. Homeless people NOT allowed in Oratory! 

It’s acts of mercy that I want, says the Lord, not material sacrifices and candles! 

God does not need your candles!

Saint Joseph does not need your candles.

People, please STOP DONATING to the ORATORY of St. Joseph and instead donate your money to Red Cross, Doctors without Borders, your local charities, and the homeless shelters of Montreal. 

God will listen more to your prayers - through your acts of charity - because they are better than material candles and money you give to the wealthy billionaire CSC religious Holy Cross family of Saint Brother Andre.   

God said in the Bible:  It isn’t material sacrifice that I want, but acts of mercy.  

 If you were to face Christ on Judgement Day today, He will not ask you how many candles you have lit at the Oratory of St. Joseph, buthow many poor people you have helped, as He has said, “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, that you have also done to Me.”   

Christ also said, when you pray, go to your room, close the door and pray to your Father in secret, and he will hear your prayers

ST. JOSEPH DU MONT-ROYAL - L'Oratoire Saint-Joseph du Mont-Royal

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights: Neither Religious nor Civil 

Why does the Catholic League exist? What are its tactics? And who are its allies? 

Editor’s note: The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights apparently has a single mission: suppression of all mainstream criticism of the Catholic church. In addition to embarrassment, the organization uses intimidation, bullying and distortion to suppress critics of the Catholic church, the Vatican, and the church’s many controversial policies. Given this November’s US presidential election and the Catholic church’s immense stake in the outcome, this report by Catholics for Choice is as relevant and revealing today as when it was first published in 2008.

Most American Catholics would look at you blankly if you asked them to enumerate the number of times in their lives they had experienced anti-Catholic sentiment. But Bill Donohue lives in another America—one where anti-Catholicism is alive and well and spreading like wildfire. It is the America of the Catholic League, a small, reactionary, conservative Catholic organization that has practiced the art of media manipulation to claim majority status for what is a very minority worldview.

In Donohue’s own words, the Catholic League specializes in “public embarrassment of public figures who have earned our wrath.”[1] In addition to embarrassment, the organization uses intimidation, bullying and distortion to suppress critics of the Catholic church, the Vatican, and the church’s many controversial policies. It is an ally of the radical religious right, helping to promote its anti-reproductive rights, anti-gay rights, pro-censorship agenda by labeling progressive Catholics as “anti-Catholic” and using its “Catholic” nomenclature to try and undermine support for the Democratic Party among religious voters.
Why does the Catholic League exist? What are its tactics? And who are its allies? 


William Donohue

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights was founded in 1973 in Milwaukee by Father Virgil C. Blum, a conservative Jesuit priest and professor of political science at Marquette University, following the Roe v. Wade decision, to fight legalized abortion and what he saw as the removal of religious values from American public life. Blum was a pioneer of the “school choice” movement to allow public funding of parochial school education. He believed that anti-Catholicism was widespread and increasing and that Catholics needed a “civil rights” organization. This, despite the gains made by Catholics in almost ever sector of life in the second half of the 20 century, including the election of a Catholic president, the rise of numerous Catholics in politics and business and the end of formal discriminatory practices against Catholics.
The Catholic League immediately set itself up on the right flank of traditional conservatives in order to dictate its concept of morals to society—including the suppression of abortion, homosexuality and dissent against the Catholic church. “The high priests of the religion of secular humanism are striving mightily to drive religion out of human affairs—out of education, business, the professions, and in recent years most pronouncedly out of government. It is our position that religious-based values are fundamental to all aspects of human affairs,” Blum explained in 1982.[2]

From the beginning, the organization was marked by the schizophrenic attitude that would become its hallmark: It simultaneously argued for the right of conservative Catholics to impose their values in the public sphere, while arguing against the right of others in the public sphere to offer legitimate criticism of Catholics or Catholicism. 

Blum wasn’t much of an administrator or organizer. As a result, the early efforts of the Catholic League were scattershot. It litigated on behalf of Catholics whom it believed had been discriminated against and rallied periodically against what it said were anti-Catholic media portrayals, such as ABC’s steamy mini-series The Thornbirds about a Catholic priest who fathers an illegitimate child, but attracted little attention.[3]
Prominent board members rebelled against Blum’s “lackadaisical” management style in the mid-1980s, and the organization was in turmoil in the years before his death in 1990.[4] When retired Rear Admiral John Tierney was appointed president of the organization in October of 1990, he admitted that he had never heard of it until he was asked to become president.[5] Over the next few years, the organization remained in crisis as a series of leaders came and went, revenue declined and membership plummeted from 50,000 to 30,000.[6]

In 1993 the board appointed William A. Donohue to replace Blum as president. Donohue came to the Catholic League from the Heritage Foundation, where he specialized in attacks on the ACLU, and had connections within the conservative community. He attracted a list of prominent Catholic conservatives to the Board of Advisors, including Mary Ann Glendon, Michael Novak, Linda Chavez and George Weigel.

Donohue quickly hit upon a strategy to increase the profile of the beleaguered organization. The Catholic League protested an ad on New York City buses that showed Madonna (the singer) next to the Madonna in an ad for VH1, the music TV network, which read: “VH1, the difference between you and your parents.” Donohue argued that the city bus was public property and as such no religious symbolism was allowed; however, “if it’s used with Madonna in a form of blasphemy, it is acceptable. Suddenly it becomes freedom of speech. The double standard is an outrage.”[7]

The charge that the ad ridiculed Catholicism was itself ridiculous; the Virgin Mary is a widely recognized cultural symbol throughout the world and the ad made only a mild joke that was not at her expense. But instinctively most people are loath to be accused of religious insensitivity, and apparently the Metropolitan Transit Authority is no exception. Rather than question whether the ad was really anti-Catholic, it pulled it to avoid further controversy. Donohue became a minor media celebrity with New York City media as a result of the “controversy,” giving numerous radio and newspaper interviews. Soon afterwards, he was being ushered into a private meeting with New York Cardinal John O’Connor, whose attention had been caught by the protest.
Now Donohue just needed a bigger target to get national media attention. It came along in 1995 in the form of the movie Priest, a small art film which dealt with priests struggling with, among other things, celibacy and homosexuality. The Catholic League launched a high-profile campaign condemning the movie, which was produced by Disney subsidiary Miramax. Donohue claimed that only Catholics could be so defiled—political correctness wouldn’t allow groups like Jews or African Americans to be maligned. The organization ran ads in the New York Times denouncing Disney as anti-Catholic and called for a boycott of the organization. National media attention of the “controversy,” which had been single-handedly created by Donohue, soon followed. Donohue had found his métier. The following years would find Donohue in a constant quest for the next “controversy” to keep his particular brand of reactionary Catholicism in the media spotlight.


The Catholic League’s tactics can be summarized as attack early and often—and loudly. Donohue obsessively mines popular culture, politics and the public sphere for self-identified infractions against traditional Catholicism, Christianity or “common decency” that can be manufactured into his trademark “controversies.” Most of his examples are laughable; those that aren’t are legitimate forms of free speech or artistic expression which he twists into attacks on Catholicism. As John M. Swomley, a noted researcher on the religious right noted, the Catholic League “redefines religious and civil rights as opposites to those normally understood as constitutional rights.”[8] In other words, an individual’s freedom of speech or expression is trumped by Donohue’s right not to be offended by speech that challenges his brittle worldview.
Once Donohue has found a “controversy” he uses wildly inflated rhetoric that is sure to inflame—either in print or in one of his infamous cable TV news appearances—and then stages a protest or takes out an ad in the New York Times to attract attention. Then he waits for the seemingly ever-receptive press to show up. His early attacks on the movie Priest illustrate his strategy perfectly and why it became like public relations “crack” to him.

Tactic #1: Manufacture Controversy and They Will Come

The 1995 movie Priest, as well as the 1997 television series Nothing Sacred, came along at a time of earnest exploration of the deep contradictions inherent in the Catholicism put forth by the ecclesiastical hierarchy. Long-simmering questions about sexuality—from the wisdom of requiring priests to remain celibate, to the subculture of homosexuality that had existed semi-openly within the church, to reproductive choice for women—were openly being questioned by Catholics and non-Catholics alike. Hints of the clergy sexual abuse scandal that would rock the church were also gaining attention.

Popular culture was engaging in a vigorous debate about what it meant to be Catholic and how this was to be reconciled with very non-Christian attitudes toward marginalized groups such as homosexuals. For the keepers of traditional, hierarchical, patriarchal Catholicism, this was a dangerous debate. Donohue’s job was, and is, to shut down the debate itself over these issues that threaten to cleave the Catholic church. To do this, Donohue’s rhetoric insists that: a) non-Catholics have no right to participate in this debate and any non-Catholics who do so are inherently anti-Catholic (this despite the widespread influence that the Catholic church has in society at large on non-Catholics through its provision of education and health care, and vigorous lobbying of public officials on issues of concern to the church, such as abortion); and b) Catholics who engage in such debate are by definition “bad” Catholics who are out to destroy the church and therefore have no legitimate role in the debate.

Their artistic merits notwithstanding, both Priest and Nothing Sacred used priests as characters to examine the challenges facing the church and its evolution, or stasis, in response to these challenges. They dealt with sensitive subjects—homosexuality, abuse, celibacy and the very meaning of faith—that were taboo until fairly recently. People disagree about how the church should handle these issues and how central they are to the ability of the hierarchy to continue to claim to represent the Catholic people, but few would disagree that they are issues that need to be addressed. In a review in the Catholic magazine America, Richard Blake noted that Priest “could generate a healthy debate for churches and media alike to join.”[9]

But Bill Donohue was not looking to create “healthy” debate. He labeled any attempt to explore these difficult issues as an attack on Catholicism, again playing into most people’s natural reluctance to insult religious beliefs and their lack of understanding of the history of healthy dissent within the Catholic church. He claimed that Priest was “designed intentionally to insult the Catholic church and Catholics nationwide” and to suggest that the “depraved condition” of the priests portrayed is a result of the warped nature of the church.[10] He claimed that the director of the movie was “an anti-Catholic bigot,”[11] although she herself said the movie was both a celebration of Catholicism and a protest “against a hierarchy adhering to old-fashioned rules.”[12]

Donohue’s outlandish claims of Catholic bashing quickly attracted media attention, stoked by the Catholic League’s threatened boycott of Miramax’s parent company Disney and high-profile ads in the New York Times. The Knights of Columbus sold its 50,000 shares of Disney stock. Republican Sen. Bob Dole, who was running for president, singled out the movie on a Meet the Press appearance as evidence that Hollywood lacks “family values.”[13]

Soon the Washington Post, the New York Times and other media outlets were covering the “controversy” that Donohue had single-handedly manufactured. While the US Catholic Conference urged Catholics to ignore the movie and not give it any free publicity, Donohue stoked the rhetorical fires, leading to New York Cardinal John O’Connor, who hadn’t even seen the movie, to make headlines when he called it “as viciously anti-Catholic as anything that has ever rotted on the silver screen.”[14]

In the end, Miramax released the movie, although it did reschedule a planned opening on Good Friday, undoubtedly to larger audiences than would normally have occurred for an art film because of the publicity offered by the Catholic League. But Donohue had perfected a media strategy that he would use again and again: generate controversy by claiming that something that was examining or questioning the Catholic church or its policies was actually a despicable form of anti-Catholicism. He knew the media couldn’t resist a controversy; all he had to do was make one up.

Tactic #2: Try to Intimidate the “Enemy”

Donohue struck again two years later when ABC aired Nothing Sacred, a TV series about a young priest struggling with celibacy and his faith. This time he added another tactic that would become standard for the Catholic League—attempted intimidation. Even before the show debuted, Donohue was priming the controversy machine, telling readers of the League’s journal Catalyst to contact ABC to “express their concerns” about the show because it might portray a priest at odds with some church teaching.[15] Then the League went after potential sponsors for the show, threatening to brand them as anti-Catholic and conduct a wide-scale boycott.

The Catholic League ran an intimidating ad in the advertising industry publication Ad Age headlined: “Thinking about Advertising on ABC’s “Nothing Sacred”? THINK AGAIN.” The ad went on to threaten to organize the organization’s claimed 350,000 members “to conduct a campaign against the sponsors that they won’t forget… A word to the wise: take this campaign seriously and move your ad money to some other show.”[16] To back up its threat, the Catholic League kept a running list of “persistent” ad sponsors on its Web site.[17]

Because the show was generally respectful to Catholicism, Donohue had a hard time playing the anti-Catholic card. So he trotted out what would become another standard Catholic League claim—that the show should be cancelled because it was “pure propaganda for Catholic malcontents and those who have an animus against Catholicism.”[18] He went so far as to claim that ABC had a political agenda in running the show: “The reason that the show has always been treated differently by ABC is due to its birth: its womb is political. In other words, propaganda dressed as entertainment has been the essence of ‘Nothing Sacred’ de novo.”[19]

The creator of Nothing Sacred insisted it was not a polemic but an exploration of the characters’ “humanity and inner lives.” Four Catholic bishops, as well as numerous priests and nuns, signed an advertisement in support of the show and challenging the charge that it was anti-Catholic. The ad, which was signed by Bishop Raymond Lucker of New Ulm, Minnesota, and Auxiliary Bishops Philip Francis Murphy of Baltimore, Peter Rosazza of Hartford, and Thomas Gumbleton of Detroit, said Catholic leaders cannot “stand idly by while a wonderful television show is unfairly maligned.” The ad went on to say: 

“There are many voices of Catholicism in America. The Catholic League, which has orchestrated an advertiser boycott of the program, does not represent them all. In fact, by their own numbers, they represent less than one percent. They do not speak for most American Catholics. They do not speak for us. We believe ‘Nothing Sacred’ has wit, intelligence, and compassion and can serve as a positive vehicle for discourse.”[20] 

Lucker soundly rejected the idea that the show was anti-Catholic. “I don’t find people offended by it,” he said, adding, “Donohue makes it sound like he’s speaking for every Catholic in the country, but he’s really just promoting a conservative agenda. It’s not everybody else’s position.”[21]

Eventually ABC pulled the show due to low ratings. The Catholic League, however, was quick to take credit for the demise of the show and tout it as a demonstration of its considerable power. It claimed it had driven 34 advertisers from the show; however, only two, Isuzu and Weight Watchers, confirmed they had pulled their ads due to viewer protest.[22][23] In fact, many of the sponsors who pulled ads from the show said they did so because of poor ratings. Both AT&T and Sears, two major sponsors that the Catholic League took credit for driving away from the show, said the threatened boycott had nothing to do with their decision; Sears said it had never even heard of the Catholic League.[24]

Donohue is constantly threatening to sic the organization’s 350,000 members on people or organizations that don’t toe the League’s line. When Wal-Mart changed “Christmas” to “holiday” on its Web site, Donohue threatened a nationwide boycott of the retailer for “banning” Christmas.[25] When the Democratic National Committee refused to remove a link to Catholics for a Free Choice (as the organization was known then) from its Web site, Donohue threatened to try and undermine the Democratic Party with critical Catholic voters by branding it “anti-Catholic” if it didn’t “dump” CFFC from its Web site:
“Let me be clear about what we want….If the DNC continues to list CFFC anywhere on its web page, it does so at its own peril: the Catholic League will be the DNC’s greatest nightmare in 2004…only a fool would doubt us.”[26] 

In any case, a review of the Catholic League’s membership figures suggests it actually has less than 100,000 members (see Membership and Financials). Nor has it ever demonstrated the ability to pull off a wide-scale boycott. Usually it threatens a boycott and then calls it off shortly later when the targeted party makes some minor concession it can trump as a “victory,” such as when Wal-Mart re-renamed the “holiday” section of its Web site the “Christmas” section.[27]

Tactic #3: Bully the Opposition

Bill Donohue is an acknowledged master of rhetorical bullying. No attack is too harsh; no language too extreme. The rise of the Catholic League coincided with the increase in 24-hour cable news programming and its insatiable appetite for controversy. Bill Donohue is made-to-order for the high-decibel histrionics of cable news, where he is a frequent guest, especially on conservative shows. He made 23 guest appearances on TV news shows in 2004 alone. Despite his claims that Catholicism and Christianity aren’t respected, he frequently has made inflammatory remarks about people of other faiths—especially Jews and Muslims—and has perfected diatribes against progressives and homosexuals:

“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK? And I’m not afraid to say it.” (Scarborough Country, Dec. 8, 2004)[28]

“Look, there are people in Hollywood, not all of them, but there are some people who are nothing more than harlots. They will do anything for the buck. They wouldn’t care. If you asked them to sodomize their own mother in a movie, they would do so, and they would do it with a smile on their face.” (Scarborough Country, Feb. 9, 2006)[29]

“After all, 15-year-olds, they go to abortionists. They get their babies killed without parental consent. The new Puritans [those criticizing The Passion of the Christ] don’t seem to worry about that. They like gay sex…The same people in the New York Times who say this movie, I don’t think it’s not really right for kids, they have no problems when it comes to sodomy. It’s smoking they don’t like and Catholicism.” (Scarborough Country, Feb. 25, 2004)[30]

“Now, in this country, we are civilized. We don’t appreciate it when somebody sticks it to you in the name of freedom of speech, sir. We condemn it. But over there, they take the uncivilized approach. And then they wonder why so many people don’t trust the Muslims when it comes to liberty, because they will abuse it.” (Scarborough Country, Feb. 9, 2006)[31]

The gay community has yet to apologize to straight people for all the damage that they have done—for contaminating the blood supply in New York City and around the country. And I find it amazing that, when people are acting so morally delinquent, that they’re asking for more rights at the same time.” (Scarborough Country, April 11, 2005) 

In a 2002 segment on MSNBC’s Alan Keyes Is Making Sense discussing the pedophile controversy within the Catholic church, Donohue attacked progressive Catholic activist Sister Maureen Fiedler and Mary Louise Cervone of Dignity/USA, the nation’s largest gay Catholic membership organization:

William Donohue (after Keyes lectures Sister Fiedler then abruptly asks Donohue a question, at which time Fiedler starts to respond to inaccuracies in Keyes’ statement): “I got the question! I got the question, lady! Hey, you with the earrings, hold up!” (Donohue subsequently used gestures like twirling his finger around his ear on-camera to mock Fiedler and Cervone when they spoke).

Donohue (shouting at Cervone and referring to a priest accused of child sexual abuse who was a former member of Dignity/USA): “YOU’RE in denial! [Paul] Shanley’s your boy! Shanley is your boy; he’s not my boy! That’s your boy! You’re concerned about children but you’re in favor of partial-birth abortions! Tell it to somebody who you can sell the Brooklyn Bridge to! Don’t tell it to me, lady!”[32]

Former Catholics for Choice President Frances Kissling, no stranger to cable news shows, admitted that after a few run-ins with Donohue she didn’t want to appear with him because she felt threatened by him: “He never physically threatened me, but I felt like I was in the presence of an abuser,” she said.[33]

Mark Silk, director of Trinity College’s Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life, said of Donohue’s tactics: “He’s a thug. He reverts to bullying because he thinks that’s what the job entails.”[34]

Recently, Donohue’s hate-filled rhetoric appears to be inciting some of his “followers” to cross the line beyond rhetorical bullying. A blogger fired from John Edward’s presidential campaign after being attacked in a series of press releases from the Catholic League for her provocative statements about religion reported receiving numerous physical and sexual threats (see Playing Politics). 

When Donohue whipped up a fury of indignation against a life-sized, anatomically correct chocolate statue of Jesus by artist Cosimo Cavallaro that was to be displayed in the Lab Gallery in a New York hotel—calling it “one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever”—the hotel cancelled the My Sweet Lord exhibition after receiving death threats.[35] Matt Semler, the gallery’s creative director, who resigned in protest, said the exhibition was the victim of “strong-arming from people who haven’t seen the show, seen what we’re doing. They jumped to conclusions completely contrary to our intentions.”[36]

Tactic #4: Complain Early and Often

Volume is a key element of the Catholic League’s tactics. By complaining vigorously against every perceived slight against Catholicism—and often expanding its already broad definition of anti-Catholicism to include anything perceived as anti-Christian—Donohue makes it seem as if the world is awash in anti-Catholic bigots. Donohue is a one-man flurry of letters to the editor, writing to newspapers around the country to correct any perceived slight against Catholics. Each year, the League collects all of its complaints into an annual report that it mails to lawmakers, the press and opinion leaders to show, in Donohue’s words, the “extent and depth of anti-Catholic sentiment in society.”[37] A review of complaints in the 1995 report alone shows how broad Donohue’s definition of anti-Catholic is:

Republican Gov. Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey was called anti-Catholic for not halting a state-funded university’s production of Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All for You, a play mocking the strict, old-fashioned Catholic church.

The New Yorker was called anti-Catholic for running a cover illustration that showed an Easter bunny being crucified against a federal tax form.

Ann Landers was called anti-Catholic for calling the pope a “polack” who is “very anti-woman” and for suggesting that the pedophile scandal in the church might cause it to rethink mandatory celibacy.

The Population Institute was called anti-Catholic for circulating a fundraising letter calling the Vatican the “anti-contraceptive Gestapo” for its efforts to block consensus on the need for increased contraceptive access for women in the developing world at the Beijing Conference on Women.

The Hard Rock Cafe in Las Vegas was called anti-Catholic because it had a restored Gothic altar in one of its bars.

As outrageous as many of these charges are, they did have a chilling effect on legitimate criticism of the Catholic church. Ann Landers was forced to apologize and write a column calling the pope “heroic.”[38] The Hard Rock Cafe removed the altar after receiving a threat of a boycott of all its properties. Several key board members of the Population Institute resigned or were forced to distance themselves from the organization, including Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Sen. Barbara Boxer of California and Rep. Robert Torricelli of New Jersey.

Year after year, the Catholic League amasses a hodgepodge of supposed examples of anti-Catholicism in its annual report to illustrate what it claims is a growing tide of anti-Catholicism. The number of examples of anti-Catholicism in the report grew from 140 in 1995 to 320 in 2006, yet the only thing that seems to have actually increased is the League’s definition of anti-Catholic activity, which has become increasingly broad. In 1997, the report accused proponents of Oregon’s assisted suicide law of being anti-Catholic because they had the temerity to “challenge the Catholic Church’s position on the subject.”[39] In 1999, it accused the New York Post of anti-Catholicism for referring (accurately) to a young man convicted of manslaughter as a “former altar boy,”[40] and in 2001 it castigated a Seattle-area county executive for issuing a memo requesting that county employees use “religion-neutral language” when referring to the Christmas holiday.[41] Other “sins” against Catholicism in the same report included a soap company that manufactured a soap called “Mother Soaperior: Cleanliness is Next to Godliness” and an ad for Lipton onion soup mix that showed a man waiting in line for communion holding a bowl of onion dip.[42] Violations in the 2005 report included a school that cancelled a performance by a Christian rock band, an article in Maxim magazine about how to meet women in church, and the slighting of The Passion of the Christ by the Academy Awards when “films based on perverts like JM Barrie (Finding Neverland) and Alfred Kinsey (Kinsey)” and movies about euthanasia (Million Dollar Baby) and “Latino thug” Che Guevara (The Motorcycle Diaries) received nominations.[43] Movies were still a focus in 2006, with the Catholic League promoting a major (failed) effort to have a disclaimer run at the start of the movie adaptation of The Da Vinci Code stating that it was a work of fiction and condemning Black Christmas, a horror movie set at Christmas time.[44]

From art exhibitions depicting religious imagery, to plays examining the Catholic church either seriously or satirically (the plays Corpus Christi and Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All For You appear multiple times in every report), to opponents of school voucher plans and public officials who question privileges accorded to the Catholic church or religions in general, to just about anything involving Madonna or greeting cards with nuns, the reports detail exaggerated and imagined incidents of anti-Catholicism, as well as legitimate criticisms of the church and hierarchy spun as anti-Catholicism, in an attempt to suggest that anti-Catholic activity is a pervasive problem.

Many of the examples are impossible to confirm as bona fide instances of anti-Catholicism, for instance, church statues that have been vandalized or school plays being renamed “holiday” plays instead of Christmas plays. Few religious experts, however, would qualify most instances reported by the Catholic League as anti- Catholic. Jay Dolan, a professor of history and author of The American Catholic Experience, said of the League: “When there’s blatant discrimination against Catholics, somebody should denounce it. But it’s just not as widespread as they make it seem, and their reactions are so overblown as to be unhelpful.”[45] He went on to say the League’s reaction “borders on paranoia,” noting that anti-Catholic activity in the United States peaked before the Civil War.[46]

As thin-skinned as Donohue appears to be when it comes to any one else referring to Catholicism, Jesus or the Virgin Mary, apparently his rules don’t apply to himself and his friends. Deal Hudson, a prominent conservative writer and advisor to the Bush administration was forced to step down from the editorship of the conservative Catholic magazine Crisis after the National Catholic Reporter published an article showing that he had been dismissed from Fordham University a decade previously on morals charges. He had invited a “vulnerable freshman undergraduate” to join a group of students at a bar in Greenwich Village and ended the night exchanging “sexual favors” with her in his office.[47] Donohue downplayed the serious charge in a press release (later completely removed from the Catholic League Web site), dismissing it as “made almost a decade ago by a drunken female he met in a bar.”[48] In a bizarre attempt at a joke at the expense of the immaculate conception, the same press release read: “Effective today, the Catholic League has a new requirement for all future employees: all employees must show proof of being immaculately conceived, that is, they must demonstrate that they were conceived without sin.”[49]

Tactic #5: Attack Popular Culture

When it comes to peddling its special brand of inflammatory rhetoric, the media and arts have been a special target of the Catholic League since the mid-1990s. Donohue admitted as much when he said that attacking popular culture is “faster and easier than dealing with lawyers.”[50] 

Nothing attracts attention to the League better than an attack on a high-profile film like Dogma or The Da Vinci Code or a controversial art exhibition like Sensation, which famously featured a painting of the Virgin Mary with elephant dung on her breasts. In 2006, about one-third of the 320 reported instances of anti-Catholicism in the League’s annual report were in the arts and entertainment, everything ranging from mild jokes to a Good Morning America poll about whether priests should be allowed to marry that was open to non-Catholics for voting, to an episode of the TV show Without a Trace in which an FBI agent called exorcism “hocus pocus.”[51]

In the late 1990s, the Catholic League made headlines across the country for its protests of the play Corpus Christi, which retold the story of Jesus through the life of a gay man, and the Sensation exhibition. In both cases, the League held dramatic demonstrations during which it claimed it spoke for a majority of outraged Catholics and drew widespread media coverage with gimmicks like handing out “vomit bags” at Sensation. In both cases, Donohue generated lots of media coverage but didn’t achieve his objective—although many in the arts community worried about the long-term effect on artistic expression and public funding for the arts. Corpus Christi was temporarily cancelled as a result of the protests, but rescheduled after a counter-protest from the art community. Egged on by the Catholic League’s labeling of the exhibition as “blasphemous,” then-New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani threatened to cut the city’s funding to the Brooklyn Museum of Art and reclaim the city-owned building that housed it if Sensation were not terminated or moved. But the museum’s trustees held fast and the exhibition went forward.[52]

As far as Donohue is concerned, there is no such thing as art for arts’ sake. Works of art designed to be critical of the Catholic church or which incorporate universal, cultural symbols such as the Virgin Mary are merely a disguise for attacks on Catholics. “There is something terribly perverse going on in the artistic community. The need to offend Catholics is so deep and so sick that it can only be described as pathological…What is perhaps most disturbing about this campaign to attack Catholics is the cowardly attempt to hide this bigotry under the cover of artistic expression,” he said of the play Corpus Christi.
Donohue’s attacks on the arts are based on the assumption that only “good” Catholics—meaning traditional, obedient Catholics in agreement with the Vatican—can say how Catholic symbolism should be used. He claims for himself the right to censor art which does not agree with his concept of Catholicism. Yet when the media cover the tempests he manages to whip up from time to time, few ever stop to examine this basic premise of his objections—they just cover the dog fight.

The Catholic League and Suppression of the Press Today

Intimidation by Catholic institutions over the past hundred years has resulted in a populace woefully ignorant of the threat to American democracy posed by the Church.

Editor’s note: Given this November’s US presidential election and the Catholic Church’s immense stake in the outcome, we are publishing a series of excerpts from N4CM Chairman Dr Stephen D Mumford’s book, “The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a US Population Policy”. In the following chapter, Dr Mumford examines the principles governing the Catholic League’s behaviour, the methods leading to its success and a collection of specific acts designed to halt public criticism of the Church, as relevant and revealing today as it was when the book was first published in 1996. Chapter 9 here. Chapter 10 here. Chapter 11 here. Chapter 12 here. Chapter 13 here. Chapter 14 here. Chapter 16 here.

Photo credit: Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images

Chapter 15: The Catholic League and Suppression of the Press Today

The Catholic League was founded in 1973 by Jesuit priest Virgil Blum. William Donohue assumed leadership in July 1993.[260pp1] Since then, the membership has grown from 27,000 to 200,000.[260pp2] According to Donohue, the League has “won the support of all of the U.S. Cardinals and many of the Bishops as well…We are here to defend the Church from the scurrilous assaults that have been mounted against it, and we definitely need the support of the hierarchy if we are to get the job done.”[260pp3] Thus it can be considered an arm of the Church. It supplements or replaces priest-controlled organizations of the past described by Blanshard and Seldes. The League apparently has a single mission: suppression of all mainstream criticism of the Roman Catholic Church.

According to Donohue, it is fortunate that, “the Catholic Church is there to provide a heady antidote to today’s mindless ideas of freedom.”[260pp4] He is a strong advocate of the Church’s positions on restriction of the freedoms guaranteed by the American Constitution and condemned by popes for nearly two centuries, especially those regarding the press and speech. He informs us that: “the Catholic League is there to defend the Church against its adversaries.”[260pp4]

There are many recognizable principles governing the behavior of the League. One is revealed in a vicious 1994 attack against the New London newspaper, The Day, for an editorial critical of the Catholic Church: “What is truly ‘beyond understanding’ is not the Catholic Church’s position, it is the fact that a secular newspaper has the audacity to stick it’s nose in where it doesn’t belong. It is nobody’s business what the Catholic Church does.”[260pp5]

A second basic premise is the League’s commitment to canon 1369 of the Code of Canon Law:A person is to be punished with a just penalty, who, at a public event or assembly, or in a published writing, or by otherwise using the means of social communication, utters blasphemy, or gravely harms public morals, or rails at or excites hatred of or contempt for religion or the Church.”[260pp6] Canon law is the law of the Catholic Church. All criticism of the pope or the Church is in violation of this law in one way or another. This chapter will make clear that the League follows this canon to the letter and demands that all others conform—or pay the price for their violation.

Another principle is aggressive action. Says Donohue, “I defy anyone to name a single organization that has more rabid members than the Catholic League. Our members are generous, loyal and extremely active. When we ask them to sign petitions, write to offending parties and the like, they respond with a vigor that is unparalleled…We aim to win. Obviously, we don’t win them all, but our record of victories is impressive.”[260pp7] To justify this stance, he identifies with Patrick Buchanan’s resistance to the “Culture War” against the Catholic Church: “We didn’t start this culture war against the Catholic Church, we simply want to stop it.”[260pp8]

Donohue also justifies the League’s aggressive behavior by claiming that it is culturally unacceptable for nonCatholics to criticize the Catholic Church. “Perhaps the most cogent remark of the day,” he asserts, “came from the former Mayor of New York, Ed Koch, who politely remarked that his mother always advised him not to speak ill of other religions. It is a lesson that apparently few have learned….Non-Catholics would do well to follow the advice of Ed Koch’s mom and just give it a rest. Their crankiness is wearing thin.”[260pp9] This cultural norm is widely accepted in America, to the enormous benefit of the Vatican. What role, one wonders, did the Catholic Church play in its adoption? Certainly, in the case of population growth control, its consequence has been catastrophic.

The Catholic League strongly discourages criticism of the Church, especially attacks by the press. Says Donohue, “It does no good complaining about Catholic bashing if all we do is wait until the other side strikes.”[260pp10] Prevention of such publications is of the essence. Yet Donohue is convinced that this is not censorship: “The press and the radio talk shows asked me if the Catholic League was engaging in censorship by responding the way we did. As always, I informed them that only the government has the power to censor anything.”[260pp11] This is patently untrue.
Another tenet enunciated by Donohue: 

“I think it is a gross mistake to give elevation to fringe groups. Our basic rule of thumb is this: the more mainstream the source of anti-Catholicism, the more likely it is that the Catholic League will respond….The mainstream media, after all, have the credibility and influence that the fringe lacks, and they are therefore much more likely to do real damage.”[260pp12]
When major universities, TV networks and government officials engage in Catholic-baiting, it is a far more dangerous situation than the venom that emanates from certifiably fringe organizations.”[260pp13]
“When an establishment newspaper such as the Sun-Sentinel [Fort Lauderdale] offends, it cannot be ignored.”[260pp14]
Donohue goes on to explain the Sun-Sentinel example. On February 9, 1995, it ran an ad, paid for by a Seventh Day Adventist group, which claimed that the Catholic Church is seeking to create a New World Order to take command of the world and that the Pope and the Catholic Church were in a league with Satan.

“Accordingly, the Catholic League contacted the radio and television stations in the area, the opposition newspaper, and the nation’s major media outlets registering its outrage and its demands. We demanded nothing less than ‘an apology to Catholics and a pledge that no such ads will ever be accepted again.’ We added that ‘If this is not forthcoming, the Catholic League will launch a public ad campaign on its own, one that will directly target the Sun-Sentinel.’” 

“What exactly did we have in mind? We were prepared to take out ads in the opposition newspaper, registering our charge of anti-Catholic bigotry. We were prepared to pay for radio spots making our charge. We were prepared to buy billboard space along the majority arteries surrounding the Fort Lauderdale community. Why not? After all, …we are in a position to make such threats….This is the way it works: if the source of bigotry wants to deal with lousy publicity, it can elect to do so. Or it can come to its senses and knock it off. In the event the anti-Catholic bigots want to bite the bullet and stay the course, we’ll do everything we can within the law to make sure that they pay a very high price for doing so.”[260pp15] It goes without saying that anyone critical of the Vatican, or the hierarchy, or the Roman Catholic Church is, by definition, an anti-Catholic bigot—including Catholics themselves.

One final element makes clear the objective of the Catholic League
protection of the papacy against all criticism. Writes Donohue, “It is the conviction of the Catholic League that an attack on the Church is an attack on Catholics.”[260pp16] He offers no rationale to support this theory. Obviously, millions of liberal American Catholics would disagree outright, for it is they who have been attacking the Church.

Donohue continues, 

“Throughout American history, the job of combating anti-Catholicism fell to the clergy, and especially to the Archbishops. But times have changed….The type of anti-Catholicism that exists in American society today is fundamentally different from the genre that marked this country’s history from the outset. From colonial times to the election of John F. Kennedy as President of the United States, anti-Catholicism was vented against both individual Catholics and against the Catholic Church itself. But over the past 30 years, it has become evident that most of the Catholic-bashing centers on the institution of the Church…”[260pp17

The hierarchy cannot be effective against criticism of the institution because they are the institution. Thus, the hierarchy has had to call on the laity to protect the institution in this way. In 1971, the League’s founder pointed out, “If a group is to be politically effective, issues rather than institutions must be at stake.”

 In other words, the laity, if left to their own devices, will not defend the institution but they will defend their interests as individuals. Hence, the League has adopted this principle and has convinced its members that “an attack on the Church is an attack on Catholics.” In this way, the institution is successfully using individual lay Catholics to shield it from all criticism.


The Catholic Church in America has good reason to be intensely concerned about its image and any criticism. Donohue cites a 1995 study, “Taking America’s Pulse,” undertaken by the National Conference (formerly known as the National Conference of Christians and Jews). Despite the almost complete suppression of all criticism of the Catholic Church in America, a majority of non-Catholic Americans (55%) believe that Catholics “want to impose their own ideas of morality on the larger society.” The survey also found that 38% of non-Catholics believe that Catholics are “narrow-minded because they are too much controlled by their Church.”[260pp19] Obviously, there is a highly receptive audience in this country for any justified criticisms of the Catholic Church. If the floodgates ever opened, it is unlikely that the Church would be able to close them again. Only too well understood by the hierarchy, and the Catholic League, this perhaps explains their unmitigated intolerance for criticism.

William Donohue

Donohue has cited many of the methods used by the League, including some we have already mentioned. “We specialize in public embarrassment of public figures who have earned our wrath and that is why we are able to win so many battles: no person or organization wants to be publicly embarrassed, and that is why we specialize in doing exactly that…”[260pp20
Elsewhere he writes, “The threat of a lawsuit is the only language that some people understand. The specter of public humiliation is another weapon that must be used. Petitions and boycotts are helpful. The use of the bully pulpit—via the airwaves—is a most effective strategy. Press conferences can be used to enlighten or, alternatively, to embarrass.”[260pp21] “Ads taken out in prominent national newspapers are quite effective.”[260pp22]

The Catholic League’s Op-Ed page advertisement which appeared in the April 10, 1995 issue of The New York Times attacking Disney for its release of the excellent film, “Priest,” is a good example. This attack will be described more fully later. But on the Op-Ed page the following advertisement appears: “We’re leading a nationwide charge against Disney, making use of every legal means available—from boycotts to stockholder revolts—all designed to send a clear and unmistakable message to Michael Eisner, chairman of Disney.”[260pp23] This is only one of many staged or threatened stockholder revolts led by the League.

But probably the most effective means of suppressing criticism of the Catholic Church through the press is a constant “in your face” attack of local newspapers. In a 1995 report on the Massachusetts Chapter of the Catholic League, it is noted that the president and the executive director had been on the attack, “appearing in the media more than 600 times” in the previous five years.[260pp24] In a single state, 600 times in five years! It is no wonder that newspapers in Massachusetts are very reluctant to print any criticism of the Catholic Church, no matter how justified, given this constant barrage of punishment.

Intimidation of the media leadership and of our government by the League is achieved through the wide distribution of frequent news releases, its monthly newsletter and an annual report. In an article on the publication of its 1994 report, Donohue writes, “The purpose of the report is to educate the public and influence decision-makers in government, education and the media….The report is being distributed to all members of Congress, the White House…and to prominent members of the media and education.”
[260pp25] From an article regarding the 1995 annual report: “It has been sent to every Bishop and congressman in the nation, as well as to influential persons in the media and other sectors of society.”

[260pp26] In a February 1995 letter to the membership, Donohue announced that the 1994 report will be distributed to the press, noting “there will be little excuse left for media ignorance of Catholic-bashing.”[260pp27] Individual attacks are often announced through widely distributed press releases which are bound to capture the attention of members of the press.


The Catholic League has been remarkably successful in achieving its goals. Donohue rightfully gloats: “One of the major reasons why people are giving [donations] is the success the Catholic League has had.”[260pp28] As noted earlier, membership grew from 27,000 to 200,000 in the first two years after Donohue took control. He continues, “We have had a string of victories and we have also had an unprecedented degree of media coverage. We don’t win every fight but our overall record is quite good. Our presence on radio and TV, combined with coverage in newspapers and magazines—both religious and secular—is excellent.”[260pp29] “We’ve been featured on the television program ‘Entertainment Tonight’ and received front page coverage from national newspapers including the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.”[260pp30] The number of apologies and promises it extracts from the nation’s newspapers, TV networks and stations and programs, radio stations, activist organizations, commercial establishments, educational institutions and governments is most impressive.

The suppression of all criticism of the Catholic Church and its hierarchy is the goal of the Catholic League. The visit of the pope to the U.S. in October 1995 was a major media event. Given all the gravely serious problems faced by the Church and the enormous amount of dissent by American Catholics, as well as the growing hostility from non-Catholics as a result of the Church’s interference in American policy making, one would expect wide coverage of these realities in the media during his visit. Instead, it was treated as a triumphant return.

The Catholic League believes that it played a major role in this great public relations success—and with good reason. In August 1994, it launched a campaign to intimidate the press in an astounding advance warning to media professionals preparing for the pope’s visit to New York in late October. A letter signed by Donohue announced a press conference to be held just prior to the pope’s visit that will present “10′s of thousands of petitions from active Catholics” that have been collected over the past year.[260pp31] The petition speaks for itself. What else but intimidation of the press is the intent of this campaign?

The November 1995 issue of the League’s journal, Catalyst, is headlined, “Media Treat Pope Fairly; Protesters Fail to Score.” Donohue writes, “By all accounts, the visit of Pope John Paul II to the United States was a smashing success. Media treatment of the papal visit was, with few exceptions, very fair. Protesters were few in number and without impact. From beginning to end, this papal visit proved to be the most triumphant of them all.”[260pp32] A month later he writes, “The relatively few cheap shots that were taken at the Pope by the media in October is testimony to a change in the culture.”[260pp33] And of course the desired “change in the culture” is the elimination of criticism of the pope and his hierarchy. The Catholic League is succeeding on a grand scale far beyond what all but a handful of Americans realize.


It is clear from Donohue’s own words that prevention of any criticism is the goal of the League and that intimidation is its means of achieving this end. In a fund-raising letter mailed in December of 1995, Donohue appeals for funds to hire more staff: “We could have done more….We could have tackled other issues, thereby adding to the number of people who will think twice before crossing Catholics again.”[260pp34] From the League’s 1995 Annual Report: “It is hoped that by …[attacking critics], potential offenders will think twice before launching their assaults on Roman Catholicism.”[260pp35] This statement also makes it clear that it is the protection of the institution that is the goal, not protection of individual Catholics.

It appears that the most aggressive and extensive attack in League history was one directed at Disney for its release of the movie, “Priest.” In an editorial, Donohue forthrightly says that the purpose of the intensive attack on Disney is the prevention of the production of such critical movies in the future: “Our sights were set on what might be coming down the road, not on what had already happened.”[260pp36]

The advice given by Ed Koch’s mother—do not speak ill of other religions—has been a national ethic for nearly all of this century. This ethic, inherent in our culture, has served to suppress nearly all criticism of the Catholic Church. As a result, until its political activities were unveiled with the implementation of the bishops’ Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities in 1975, the Church had been relatively immune from mainstream criticism. Because this ethic has served the Catholic Church so well, the Church may very well have played a major role in its inculcation into our culture. With its political activity becoming increasingly evident, critics are more than ever convinced of the need for public criticism of the Catholic Church.
However, this ethic does not protect the Church from dissent within its confines which has been growing since Vatican Council II in the 1960s, and most remarkably in recent years. The American media, to avoid flying in the face of American culture by ignoring this dearly held belief, have occasionally provided a forum for this protest. The dissenters have been a significant source of criticism. The Catholic League has not overlooked this problem—indeed, it takes it very seriously. All criticism is targeted from whatever source, including members of the Church.

For example, on January 22, 1995, CBS’s “60 Minutes” broadcast a segment by Mike Wallace on the Catholic dissident group Call to Action. The Catholic hierarchy did agree to appear but dictated terms that were unacceptable to CBS. Then, according to Donohue, the Catholic League sent two letters to executive producer Barry Lando and issued the following press release on January 25: 

“The entire Call to Action segment was, from beginning to end, an exercise in intellectual dishonesty and journalistic malpractice. The decision to give high profile to the Catholic Church’s radical fringe was pure politics, and nothing short of outrageous….Allowing extremists an uncontested opportunity to rail against the Catholic Church distorts the sentiments of most Catholics and provides succor for bigots. There is a difference between reporting dissent, and promoting it….’60 Minutes’ made clear its preference, extending to the disaffected a platform that they have never earned within the Catholic community….This is propaganda at work, not journalism.”[260pp37

This press release, of course, was received across America as a powerful warning to others to steer clear of Catholic dissidents. The Catholic League then launched a national postcard mailing campaign directed at Lando personally: “…we are angered over the way you continue to present the Catholic Church….We are tired of having our Church viewed from the perspective of the disaffected.”[260pp38]
In another example, the League attacked the October 5, 1995 edition of “NBC Nightly News” with Tom Brokaw for providing a platform for Catholics for a Free Choice and Dignity. The League’s press release included the following:
“The media do a great disservice to Catholics and non-Catholics alike when Catholics for a Free Choice and Dignity are presented as though they were genuine voices in the Catholic community. The effect of such misrepresentation is to promote dissent rather than to record it. As such, it is irresponsible for the media to allow itself to become willing accomplices to public deception.”[260pp39]
The continuous intimidation is bound to have its desired effect. The April 22, 1996 issue of the New Republic magazine criticizes the League’s annual report as indicative of the League’s “paranoia.”[260pp40] The New Republic completely misses the point. One need only look at the language used in the League’s attacks. It is not defense. It is intimidating language. The report is an offensive weapon used to silence critics of the Catholic Church.


The Catholic League focuses it attention on five types of institutions: media, activist organizations, commercial establishments, educational institutions and governments.[260pp41] Donohue attributes the League’s success, in part, to its ability to stay focused.[260pp42] The League’s 1994 and 1995 annual reports alone offer 350 examples of League attacks. The numerous stunning examples from which to choose make selection for presentation difficult. These were all reported during the period from July 1994 to June 1996.

The Media

NEWSDAY—On June 1st and June 3, 1994, the Long Island daily, Newsday, published Bob Marlette cartoons which, according to the Catholic League, “raised pope bashing to a new level.”[260pp43] An apology from Newsday published in the form of a “Memo to Readers” failed to satisfy the Catholic League and a petition was distributed to Long Island pastors. On July 15, Donohue met with Newsday publisher Anthony Marro to discuss the paper’s coverage of Catholics. At the meeting, he presented 76 petitions signed by Long Island pastors expressing their concern for the way Catholics have been portrayed by the newspaper.[260pp44] This was not enough. On August 25, 1994, Donohue met with the editorial board of Newsday on the newspaper’s coverage of Catholics. Donohue complained that the absence of practicing Catholics on the editorial board resulted in an insensitivity toward Catholics.[260pp45]

PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER—An article in the September 1994 issue of the League’s journal is headlined, “Cardinal Bevilacqua Scores Philadelphia Inquirer for Church Coverage, Declines Interview”. The Inquirer had requested an interview for a major story on the Archdiocese. The Cardinal refused: “I have declined your request for an interview due to your unfair and unbalanced coverage of the Archdiocese in the last year….This view is based on a review of Inquirer articles from May 1993 to May 1994. This review included 23 articles written about the Catholic Church. Of these 23 articles, eighteen were considered to be unfair and unbalanced. The unfairness and imbalance occurred in five areas including the selection of negative topics, a disregard for positive news, the use of unqualified experts, the use of negative language and a consistent omission of factual information…It is particularly frustrating to continue to read negative characterizations of the Roman Catholic Church with no regard for our role as the largest provider of social services in Southeastern Pennsylvania and our role as the most visible religious organization in the poorest areas of our city.”[260pp46] The Cardinal makes clear that he feels he should be permitted to dictate what is written about his church to the letter, revealing an arrogance that could never coexist with a free press. Furthermore, that he would bring up the provision of social services by the Church, fully knowing that these services the Church provides are almost entirely funded by local, state and federal tax monies, is deceptive.

ASSOCIATED PRESS—On March 10, 1995, the Associated Press (AP), in a story on a court ruling upholding a law barring doctors from engaging in assisted suicide, disclosed that the federal appeals court judge was a Catholic. (The judge’s ruling was in line with his pope’s teaching on this matter.) Donohue took great offense to the AP’s identification of this judge as a Catholic and sent a letter to AP executives asking for a copy of the AP policy on the matter. The League also sent a related press release to other news outlets to inform them of this offense. Darrell Christian, AP’s Managing Editor wrote an apology. “The League is satisfied with AP’s quick response,” writes Donohue in the League’s Journal, “and expects that it will not have to call attention to such errors in the future.” Donohue’s message to the American press was loud and clear. It is not permissible for the press to identify public servants as Catholics when they uphold Catholic teachings in their public decision-making. If so, the League will come after them.[260pp47]

DISNEY—The May 1995 issue of Catalyst reports in an article, “Catholic League calls for a Boycott of Disney:” “The movie ‘Priest,’ produced by the BBC and released by Miramax, a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company, provoked the Catholic League to lead a storm of protest against the film and Disney. The movie is arguably the most anti-Catholic movie ever made.”[260pp48] This attack on Disney represents the single greatest assault in the League’s history. In an editorial, Donohue writes: “In addition to joining a boycott of everything that has the Disney label on it, we are asking everyone to sell their Disney stock. It would also send a message if everyone mailed Disney chairman Michael Eisner some old Disney toys or videos. If every Catholic League member sent even one box to Mr. Eisner, it would make an indelible impression on him.”[260pp49]
The petition against Disney reads, “We, the undersigned, have a message to Disney: you bit off more than you can chew when you offended Catholics with the release of ‘Priest.’…We hope that everyone at Disney thinks twice before offending Catholics again. Sadly, appeals to your goodwill mean nothing anymore. That is why we are hitting you in the pocketbook….The Catholic League has already tarnished your image and we have pledged to blacken it a little more.”[260pp50]
The League placed an Op-Ed page advertisement in the April 10, 1995 issue of The New York Times titled “What’s Happening to Disney?” It includes the statement: “So what is the Catholic League doing about this? We are leading a nationwide charge against Disney, making use of every legal means available—from boycotts to stockholder revolts—all designed to send a clear and unmistakable message to Michael Eisner, chairman of Disney.”[260pp51]

But the attack did not end there. On May 2, 1995, a Catholic League member, a stockholder, asked shareholders to ratify at the November meeting of the Walt Disney Company a resolution that calls for the establishment of a religious advisory committee to insure that Disney does not produce another movie like this one.[260pp52] On April 29, the League picketed Disney’s largest retail outlet in New England. A press release read: “The Catholic League intends to make the American public aware of Disney’s contemptuous disregard of the sensibilities of 59 million Catholic Americans. It is Disney that is ultimately responsible for this travesty and it is Disney that will remain the focus of our protests.”[260pp53]

In the July-August 1995 issue of Catalyst, an article, “Disney Protests Continue,” reports that the League had asked the four U.S. Senators who owned Disney stock to sell it: “Mrs. Dole announced on June 2 that she was selling more than $15,000 worth of Disney stock.” It reports that the League picketed the Dedham Community Theater in Dedham, Massachusetts, over the decision of the theater owner to show the anti-Catholic movie “Priest.” The article also reports that numerous dioceses had sold their Disney stock and that “after nine weeks in theaters, the Hollywood Reporter’s Boxoffice ranked ‘Priest’ 34th out of the top 35 movies nationwide.”[260pp54] The January-February 1996 issue reported that upwards of 100,000 petitions were sent to Disney: “…because the movie was a flop at the box office, we do not expect to be greeted with Priest II anytime soon.”[260pp55]
The League’s campaign was not just directed to Disney but to the entire film industry and to the media in general. The message: if you place the Catholic Church in a negative light, you are going to pay.
Jane Pauley—In the June 13, 1995 airing of NBC’s “Dateline ,” Jane Pauley interviewed Scott O’Grady, the U.S. pilot who was rescued in Bosnia. Pauley commented “A devout Roman Catholic, O’Grady made his confirmation at age thirteen, and unlike many of his peers never left the Church.” The Catholic League was angered by this comment and Donohue wrote to Bob Wright, CEO of NBC, demanding that Pauley be fired immediately for this terrible offense. For maximum effect, Donohue released a statement explaining his actions to the press to insure that all got the message.[260pp56]

Bill Press—On July 16, 1995, KFI Radio [Los Angeles] talk show host Bill Press, a Roman Catholic, was critical of the pope and the Catholic Church. According to the September 1995 issue of the League’s Catalyst, “The Catholic League issued the following statement to the press on this matter: ‘The issue here is not simply the vile comments of Bill Press. The issue is the willingness of a respected radio station to keep him on payroll….The Catholic League does not want equal time to respond to Press, rather it wants him fired.’”[260pp57] By distributing this press release, the League was sending a message to everyone in the press—if you are critical of the pope or the Catholic Church, we are coming after you and your employer.

Liz Langley and the Orlando Weekly—Liz Langley wrote a light article about communion wafers in the August 10-16, 1995 edition. The League took great offense and issued a statement to the press that included the following: “The Langley piece is one of the most anti-Catholic articles to have appeared in some time….Accordingly, I will now mobilize a public relations offensive against the newspaper, using every tactic this side of the law to discredit the paper.”[260pp58] Donohue’s press release may have been meant to intimidate other reporters. Nearly a year after the incident, I talked with Editor Jeff Truesdell. Nothing ever came of the League’s threats. Of course, no one ever reported this to the thousands of reporters who read the press release from Donohue.
FOX-TV In September 1995, Mother Teresa was used to make a comedic point in a promotional spot for the Fox-TV program, The Preston Episodes. The Catholic League complained to the Los Angeles Office of Fox and “an apology was extended and a pledge not to run the offensive spot again was made.”[260pp59]

BRAVO Network’s “Windows”—A program which aired on September 24, 1995 on the cable network Bravo, featured a dance routine involving a priest dealing with temptation from a nun. “The Catholic League registered its outrage to Bravo, the ‘Windows’ producer Thomas Grimm, and Texaco Performing Arts Showcase, which sponsored the program.”[260pp60] In December the League reported that Texaco had apologized for sponsoring this segment. Texaco also stated to Dr. Donohue that henceforth there would be a “screening procedure for the Texaco Performing Arts Showcase.”[260pp61]

New Britain Herald—Connecticut’s New Britain Herald published a syndicated cartoon which shows the three Magi going to visit the Baby Jesus. One of the shepherds says, “Wait…aren’t we just encouraging these teen-age pregnancies?” League members complained to the newspaper that this was anti-Catholic bigotry. The newspaper issued an apology on its editorial page.[260pp62]
Ann Landers—In an interview with Christopher Buckly in the December 4, 1995 edition of the New Yorker, columnist Ann Landers criticized Pope John Paul II. “After first making a favorable comment about the Pope, Landers remarked, ‘Of course, he’s a Polack. They’re very antiwomen.’ …Landers later apologized for the crack about the Pope…The Catholic League sent its own comments to the New Yorker and further disseminated its views via a news release and radio interviews….(T)he Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has decided to drop Landers’ column beginning in 1996.”[260pp63]

ABC’s “The Naked Truth”—The League strongly attacked the January 10 edition of the ABC show “The Naked Truth.” The League’s letter to ABC included this threat: “We will contact the sponsors of the program and will alert our members to take action against them. Knowing our members, they won’t hesitate to do so.” This report, which appears in the March 1996 issue of Catalyst, listed the names, addresses and phone numbers of the eight sponsors of that show.[260pp64]

“Dave, Shelly & Chainsaw” -San Diego radio program—The April 1996 edition of Catalyst reports on an attempt by the League’s San Diego Chapter to have the “Lash Wednesday” segment of the Dave, Shelly & Chainsaw program discontinued. The local chapter charged that the “humor” was “unacceptable” and the segment must be discontinued. But it failed. At that point the national office of the Catholic League got involved and placed an ad in the San Diego Union-Tribune “calling attention to this outrage.” This prompted media requests for interviews with the chapter president who appeared live on KGTV, the ABC affiliate. The tenor of this interview was “so controversial” that the station was pressured to invite him back a second time. “This time the television reporters were much more respectful.” The League asked its members nationwide to contact the radio station General Manager and the President of PAR Broadcasting Company to demand that this segment be discontinued, providing his address, phone and fax numbers.[260pp65]

PBS’ Frontline—On February 6, 1996, PBS aired a program called, “Murder on ‘Abortion Row’”. The two hour special was a serious look at the life of John Salvi, the person who killed two women and wounded five others working at an abortion clinic in 1994. Salvi is a devout Catholic and had planned to become a Catholic priest. The Catholic League was given an opportunity to preview the program. It immediately released a statement to the press attacking the documentary which began, “The Frontline program, “Murder on ‘Abortion Row,’” is nothing more than a front for Planned Parenthood and an irresponsible propaganda piece against Catholicism.”[260pp66]
NEWSDAY—On March 12, 1996, the Long Island newspaper, Newsday, ran a headline which read, “Ex-Alter Boy on Trial.” The League protested. Donohue called the paper’s editor: “The content and tone of his remarks assured Donohue that this would not happen again.”[260pp67] Newsday subsequently published a League letter-to-the-editor which was very critical of the newspaper.
HBO—On May 6, 1996, Home Box Office aired “Priestly Sins: Sex and the Catholic Church.” The one hour special focused on the issue of sexual abuse in the priesthood. The League issued a lengthy news release which sharply attacked HBO: “The film is classic propaganda…HBO is not the first to float the idea that a ‘code of secrecy’ keeps the Church from revealing the truth about clergy sexual abuse: that honor extends to the Nazis and others. The Catholic League will call on all Catholics to boycott HBO…”[260pp68]
Sony—The June 1996 issue of Catalyst reported on the Sony movie, “The Last Supper”: “The movie, while not offensive to Catholics, nonetheless offended Catholics with its promotional material. The League…wrote a letter of protest to Sony Picture Releasing President, Jeffrey Blake. The response from Sony was decisive: ‘We have taken the unusual step of modifying our marketing campaign’….The League is satisfied with this modification.”[260pp69]
AP—On March 31, 1996, the Associated Press ran a story about a suburban Chicago man suspected of assassinating a Philadelphia policeman a quarter-century ago. The story, which was distributed to newspapers all over the country, mentioned that the accused was “23, a Catholic school-educated telephone repairman, when the shooting occurred.” The League sent a letter of protest to the president of AP and urged all of its members to do the same, providing his name and address to them.[260pp70]

QVC Shopping Network—Continental Cablevision in New England had conducted a survey of 32,000 subscribers and found that viewers preferred to drop the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), the Catholic cable network, in favor of the QVC Shopping Network. The New England Chapter of the Catholic League sharply opposed this change and Continental was muscled into continuing programming of EWTM.[260pp71]

Commercial establishments

Barneys New York—On December 9, 1994, the League successfully pressured Barneys of New York, an upscale clothing store, into removing an “offensive” nativity scene from its storefront window on Madison Avenue and 61st Street. Donohue informed Barneys that it had about four hours to contact the League, otherwise the media would be contacted. It didn’t take long before Simon Doonan, a senior vice president, called Donohue and extended an apology. However, Doonan flatly declined to do anything about the exhibit. Donohue then released a statement to the media that included the following comments: “Barneys New York and Christie’s have cooperated in promoting an insulting anti-Christian exhibit….Plainly put, this means that Barneys will respect the right of artists to show disrespect for the rights of Catholics. The Catholic League will disseminate this news to as wide an audience as possible. We do not accept Mr. Doonan’s apology: apologies unaccompanied by corrective action do not assuage.”[260pp72]
Catalyst went on to report: “Within hours of releasing this statement, the television cameras were in Dr. Donohue’s office. Just about every radio and television station in New York commented on the Barney exhibit….Barneys pulled the display from the window…giving the work back to the artist….In response to all of this, Barneys took out full page ads in The New York Times, New York Post and New York Daily News, apologizing for what had happened. The ads, together with the boycotts that were instituted, wound up costing Barneys hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost sales.”[260pp72] Now that’s success!
Hard Rock Casino and Hotel—The December 1995 issue of Catalyst reports: “When the Hard Rock Casino and Hotel opened last March in Las Vegas, it featured a restored carved gothic altar in one of its cocktail bars….The offensive use of the altar has been a source of criticism by many area Catholics.” The local bishop complained to the owner, Peter Morton, who said it would be removed. After seven months of inaction, the Catholic League got involved. The League outlined its strategy to the press: “…the time has now come to put public pressure on Mr. Morton. The Catholic League will contact the media in Las Vegas about this incident, and will alert the national media to it as well. We will also take out ads in the local newspapers, as well as the diocesan newspaper, requesting Catholics not to patronize the Hard Rock Casino and Hotel and to organize demonstrations in front of the establishment. We will also contact local Catholic organizations to organize phone trees and deliver their message straight to Mr. Morton. If more pressure is needed, we will bring it to bear, including a national boycott of all Hard Rock Cafes.”[260pp73]
The Catholic League followed through on its promise by taking out three ads in area newspapers.[260pp74] Hard Rock quickly responded saying it would remove the altar on November 30. The report ended, “The Catholic League will announce its next move once it finds out what happens on November 30.[260pp75]
An article in its January/February 1996 issue: “Victory is Always Sweet: Hard Rock Hotel Pulls Altar” reads: “After responding to pressure brought by the Catholic League, the Hard Rock Hotel…withdrew an offensive altar from its bar…By giving the incident publicity, both nationally as well as locally, the Catholic League was able to secure the support of many influential Catholics, some of whom put pressure on Hard Rock….It cost Hard Rock approximately a quarter million dollars to remove the altar… we won.”[260pp76]
William Paterson College—On July 5, 1994, Professor Vernon McClean, an instructor in the African-American and Caribbean studies department at William Paterson College at Wayne, New Jersey, opened the first session of his summer class, “Racism and Sexism in a Changing America,” by saying the pope is a racist. The League was contacted and it sent representatives to the college. “No one in any office would speak with us. They took great umbrage at our inquiry and were totally uncooperative. We received the same treatment from three different offices—we were either dismissed or treated as though we had no right to be questioning the incident. Following this lack of cooperation and response from the college, we issued a press release demanding an apology from the college and disciplinary action against Professor McLean. The New Jersey papers gave the issue thorough coverage and the New York radio and television media also took note.”[260pp77]
After the college completed its investigation, it made a public statement that “the College is satisfied that the matter has been resolved fully and completely.” The League, however was not satisfied. “Accordingly, the Catholic League called upon state officials to conduct a formal hearing on the campus of William Paterson College; Governor Christie Whitman, senior higher education officials and area legislators were contacted….But thus far she (Governor Whitman) has been mute….The Catholic League will not be satisfied until justice has been done. Our goal is not to simply chastise one college professor….We’re taking the long view on this one and it would behoove people like President Speert (Paterson College president) to do likewise.”[260pp77]
University of Michigan—The University of Michigan student newspaper, The Michigan Daily, ran a cartoon that mocked Newt Gingrich’s promotion of Boys Town and also related to the pedophilia problem in the Catholic priesthood. Donohue wrote a threatening letter to Dr. James Duderstadt, President of the University of Michigan: “Enclosed is a copy of a cartoon that was run in The Michigan Daily….Please be advised that as president of the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, I am prepared to do what is necessary to rid your campus of the bigotry it presently entertains.”[260pp78]
The very next issue of Catalyst reads: “We are happy to report that an apology from the cartoonist and a conciliatory letter from Dr. Duderstadt have brought this issue to a close.”[260pp79]
Activist Organizations
The Population Institute—In a May 1995 fund-raising letter, Werner Fornos, president of The Population Institute, wrote the following: “The Vatican continues to undermine the advancements we’ve made in Cairo on issues of pregnancy prevention. The anti-contraceptive gestapo has vowed to double the number of its delegation (to the U.N.’s Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing) to 28 and to turn once more to weaken the cause of reproductive rights.” The July-August, 1995 issue of Catalyst describes the League’s response in an article, “Nazi Slur of Vatican Implicates Congressmen.”[260pp80]
In a news release, the Catholic League issued the following remarks: “The Population Institute proves once again that some of the anti-natalist forces are unquestionably anti-Catholic. Not content, or able, to debate the issues on their merits, these activists seek to defame the Holy See and thereby discredit its influence. Members of The Population Institute who share its politics, but not its bigotry, should make a clear and decisive break with the organization…. Accordingly, the Catholic League calls upon the following advisors to The Population Institute to resign immediately: Sen. Paul Simon, Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Rep. Jim Leach, Rep. Robert Torricelli and Rep. Sam Gejdenson. Not to resign would be to give tacit support to anti-Catholicism…The Catholic League [also] wrote to each Congressman involved in this scandal.”[260pp80]
The September 1995 issue of Catalyst reports: “Senator Daniel K. Inouye complied with the League’s request and resigned from the Population Institute. Senator Barbara Boxer of California put The Population Institute on notice, warning that any future examples of ‘inappropriate’ and ‘offensive’ fundraising letters would lead her ‘to reconsider’ her position with the organization. Congressman Robert Torricelli of New Jersey…warned The Population Institute to be more careful in how it phrases its letters.”[260pp81]
Anti-Defamation League—On December 1, 1995, the ADL notified the publisher, Hippocrene Books that it was granting a prestigious literary award to Richard Lukas for his book, Did the Children Cry? Hitler’s War Against Jewish and Polish Children. Lukas was to receive the literary award, plus a prize of $1,000 on January 23, 1996 at the ADL’s headquarters in New York. On January 10, the ADL’s Mark Edelman, wrote to the publisher stating that a mistake had been made; that subsequent review led to a decision to reverse the initial judgment. The May 1996 issue of Catalyst reports, “When the Catholic League learned of what had happened, it was incensed.” Donohue wrote a letter to Edelman: “For the record, I would like to know exactly why the book was selected for an award in the first place. Surely there are records of this evaluation. And I would also like to know why those reasons were found unpersuasive—and by whom—at a later date.”
The report continues: “The Catholic League…did not receive a response from the ADL until the matter was favorably resolved on March 18. But the good news did not come until considerable pressure had been brought to bear. Before the ADL reversed its decision not to give the award, the attorney for author Lukas had already warned the ADL that it would be sued. When the ADL made its announcement to reinstate the award to Lukas, it noted that it still had several problems with the book. The ADL said that ‘we believe the book underestimates the extent of Polish anti-Semitism before and after World War II. We believe also that, while there were heroic efforts of some Poles during this time, the book appears to vastly overestimate the number of Poles who were engaged in such courageous actions. Finally, the ADL believes the book presents a sanitized picture of Polish involvement with Jews during the War and overlooks authoritative points of view of many historians, including Polish historians.’ Though justice prevailed in the end, this marks a sad chapter in the ADL’s history….We hope that the ADL has learned an important lesson and that such ‘mistakes’ will be avoided in the future.”[260pp82]
The Clinton Administration—The October 1994 Catalyst headline reads “League Assails Clinton Administration for Bigotry.” This article reports: “In an unprecedented move, the Catholic League assailed the administration of a standing president for anti-Catholic bigotry. From the time President Clinton took office, it has become increasingly evident that his administration is insensitive at best, and downright hostile at worst, to Catholic interests. But the final straw occurred during the third weekend in August. Faith Mitchell, a spokeswoman for the State Department, charged that the Vatican’s disagreement over the Cairo conference on population and development ‘has to do with the fact that the conference is really calling for girls’ education and improving the status of women.’ That statement was so outrageous that one of our members…wrote a strong letter registering her concerns to President Clinton…and [this letter] was published as a Catholic League open letter to the President in the August 29th edition of The New York Times.”[260pp83]
This open letter, published as a half-page advertisement sponsored by the Catholic League, ran in all editions of The New York Times on August 29, 1994. It viciously attacks Faith Mitchell and requests President Clinton to retract and apologize for her statement.[260pp84]
In an article published in this issue, Donohue writes: “The anti-Catholic bigots in the Clinton administration got so exercised during the Cairo conference that Leon Panetta [who is Catholic], the White House Chief of Staff, acknowledged that there was a problem with Catholic-bashing and vowed to discipline anyone who continued to chide the Vatican.”[260pp85] Apparently, any criticism of the Vatican, no matter how just, is off limits.
Dr. Joycelyn Elders—In an editorial in the January-February issue of Catalyst, “We’ve Only Just Begun,” Donohue writes, “We have rolled into 1995 with a string of victories. Dr. Elders is gone…Dr. Joycelyn Elders is one for the books. The very first news release I issued when I took over as president of the Catholic League in July 1993 was in opposition to the nomination of Dr. Elders as Surgeon General…Through the month of August, we pressed hard to stop her nomination: we held a press conference at the National Press Club and wrote to all the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but we ultimately fell short of our objective. What we did not do, however, was give up. We continued to criticize Dr. Elders whenever she made an irresponsible statement…”[260pp86]
An article in the same issue, “Elder’s Exit Applauded,” reads: “The Catholic League is delighted to see that one of the most outspoken anti-Catholic bigots in the Clinton administration has been axed. Joycelyn Elders was nominated to the office of Surgeon General by President Clinton in 1993 and confirmed later by the Senate. The Catholic League opposed her nomination and confirmation from the beginning. Her anti-Catholic statements…should have alone disqualified her from a position of national influence and authority…The Catholic League continued to speak out against her during her tenure as Surgeon General.”[260pp87]
This is but a very small sample of the attacks by the League over this two year period. It is unfortunate that space limits the number. These examples are presented almost entirely in the League’s own words. As one surveys its material, it becomes evident that all criticism of the Church or anything that places the Church in a negative light is deemed anti-Catholic, despicable and impermissible. The Church is simply above all criticism. The Catholic League obviously rejects America because it rejects what America stands for, including the freedoms of speech, expression and the press. This stand taken by the Catholic League is consistent with nearly two centuries of Catholic teaching on these matters and we should expect nothing different.
Intimidation, such as has been described in this chapter, by Catholic institutions over the past hundred years, has resulted in a populace woefully ignorant of the threat to American democracy and security posed by the Church. This intimidation has made it possible for the Church to go unchallenged.
How can Americans publicly discuss the obvious conflict between American national security-survival interests and Papal security-survival interests in this environment that the Catholic League now so effectively fosters? Obviously, it is not possible. Not only were the recommendations of the Rockefeller Commission and the NSSM 200 report never implemented, they were never publicly debated. Few Americans are even aware of NSSM 200 or this conflict in security interests. Intimidation by Catholic institutions has completely suppressed appropriate investigation of this conflict. Indeed, this intimidation has shut off the flow of the kinds of facts that resulted in these recommendations—facts of which all Americans should be fully aware. Without this vital information and discussion in a public forum, there can be no democratic solution to this conflict between the interests of the nation and of the Catholic Church—a dilemma well understood by the hierarchy.
[260pp1]. Donohue W. We’ve Only Just Begun. Catalyst January-February 1995. p. 3.
[260pp2]. Christian Coalition Conference a Success. Catalyst October 1995. p. 15.
[260pp3]. Donohue W. A Banner Year for the Catholic League. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 3.
[260pp4]. Christian Coalition Conference a Success. Catalyst October 1995. p. 15.
[260pp5]. Women’s Ordination Letter Draws Liberal Media Fire: Editorial Criticism of Papal Letter Earns Response. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 8.
[260pp6]. Sheridan A. Ignatian Society Petitions Cardinal Hickey to Remove Fr. Drinan’s Faculties. The Wanderer July 18, 1996. p. 1.
[260pp7]. Donohue W. Our Members Make This a Special Christmas. Catalyst December 1995. p. 3.
[260pp8]. Ibid.
[260pp9]. Donohue W. The Vatican, Women and Non-Catholics. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 7.
[260pp10]. Letter sent to the Catholic League Membership signed by League President William Donohue. June 1995.
[260pp11]. Donohue W. The Message From Florida Is: Bigots Beware. Catalyst April 1995. p. 3.
[260pp12]. Ibid.
[260pp13]. Donohue W. Catholic League’s 1994 Report on Anti-Catholicism. New York: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. p. 2.
[260pp14]. Donohue W. The Message From Florida Is: Bigots Beware. Catalyst April 1995. p. 3.
[260pp15]. Ibid.
[260pp16]. Donohue W. Catholic League’s 1994 Report on Anti-Catholicism. New York: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. p. 2.
[260pp17]. Ibid.
[260pp18]. Blum VC. Public Policy Making: Why the Churches Strike Out. America March 6, 1971. p. 224.
[260pp19]. Anti-Catholicism Nation’s Worst Prejudice. Catalyst July-August 1995. p. 13.
[260pp20]. Donohue W. Our Members make This a Special Christmas. Catalyst December 1995. p. 3.
[260pp21]. Donohue W. A Banner Year for the Catholic League. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 3.
[260pp22]. Letter sent to the Catholic League Membership signed by League President William Donohue. June 1995.
[260pp23]. Catholic League Op-Ed page ad which appeared in the April 10, 1995 issue of the New York Times, “What’s Happening to Disney?” signed by William A. Donohue, President.
[260pp24]. The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts Forms. The Wanderer October 8, 1995. p. 8.
[260pp25]. Report On Anti-Catholicism Released. Catalyst April 1995. p. 1.
[260pp26]. Report On Anti-Catholicism Released. Catalyst May 1996. p. 1.
[260pp27]. Letter sent to the Catholic League Membership signed by League President William Donohue. February 1995.
[260pp28]. Donohue W. A Banner Year for the Catholic League. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 3.
[260pp29]. Ibid.
[260pp30]. Letter sent to the Catholic League Membership signed by League President William Donohue. September 1995.
[260pp31]. Catholic League letter announcing a press conference signed by League President William Donohue. August 1994.
[260pp32]. Media Treat Pope Fairly; Protesters Fail to Score. Catalyst November 1995. p. 1.
[260pp33]. Donohue W. Our Members make This a Special Christmas. Catalyst December 1995. p. 3.
[260pp34]. Catholic League fundraising letter signed by William Donohue mailed December 1995.
[260pp35]. Donohue W. Catholic League’s 1995 Report on Anti-Catholicism. New York: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. p. 4.
[260pp36]. Donohue W. The Fallout Over “Priest.” Catalyst June 1995. p. 3.
[260pp37]. “60 Minutes” Rigs Show Against Catholic Church. Catalyst March 1995. p. 1.
[260pp38]. Give It To “60 Minutes”…. Catalyst March 1995. p. 4A.
[260pp39]. Media Treat Pope Fairly; Protesters Fail to Score. Catalyst November 1995. p. 1.
[260pp40]. We’re “Paranoid.” Catalyst June 1996. p. 1.
[260pp41]. Report On Anti-Catholicism Released. Catalyst May 1996. p. 1.
[260pp42]. Donohue W. Our Members make This a Special Christmas. Catalyst December 1995. p. 3.
[260pp43]. Newsday’s Marlette Offends Twice in One Week. Catalyst July-August 1994. p. 8.
[260pp44]. Meeting with Newsday Editor. Catalyst September 1994. p. 2.
[260pp45]. Meeting with Newsday Editorial Board. Catalyst October 1994. p. 2.
[260pp46]. Cardinal Bevilacqua Scores Philadelphia Inquirer For Church Coverage, Declines Interview. Catalyst September 1994. p. 6.
[260pp47]. AP Responds to League Complaint. Catalyst May 1995. p. 1.
[260pp48]. Catholic League Calls for Boycott of Disney. Catalyst May 1995. p. 1.
[260pp49]. Donohue W. There’s Anger in the Land. Catalyst May 1995. p. 3.
[260pp50]. Petition Against Disney. Catalyst May 1995. p. 5.
[260pp51]. What’s Happening to Disney?, a Catholic League Op-Ed page ad which appeared in the April 10, 1995 issue of The New York Times. Catalyst May 1995. p. 12.
[260pp52]. Disney Targeted By Resolution. Catalyst June 1995. p. 1.
[260pp53]. League Pickets Disney. Catalyst June 1995. p. 14.
[260pp54]. Disney Protests Continue. Catalyst July-August 1995. p. 4.
[260pp55]. Disney Gets Present From Catholic League. Catalyst January-February 1996. p. 9.
[260pp56]. Jane Pauley Shows Anti-Catholic Bias. Catalyst July-August 1995. p. 15.
[260pp57]. KFI Radio (Los Angeles) Insults Catholics. Catalyst September 1995. p. 5.
[260pp58]. Orlando Newspaper Insults Catholics. Catalyst October 1995. p. 6.
[260pp59]. Media Wars on Catholicism: Fox Promo Withdrawn. Catalyst November 1995. p. 4.
[260pp60]. Media Wars on Catholicism: Bravo Makes Obscene Show. Catalyst November 1995. p. 5.
[260pp61]. Texaco Apologizes, Bravo Condescends. Catalyst December 1995. p. 13.
[260pp62]. You Can Make a Difference. Catalyst December 1995. p. 2.
[260pp63]. Ann (S)Landers Lashes Out at Pope and Polish People. Catalyst January-February 1996. p. 10.
[260pp64]. ABC Show “The Naked Truth” Ridicules Catholicism. Catalyst March 1996. p. 4.
[260pp65]. San Diego Radio Program Mocks Catholicism, Drawing League Response. Catalyst April 1996. p. 1.
[260pp66]. PBS’ “Frontline” Exploits Catholicism in Abortion Program. Catalyst April 1996. p. 6.
[260pp67]. Protest of Bias Yields Favorable Result. Catalyst May 1996. p. 13.
[260pp68]. HBO Offers Tabloid Look at Catholic Church. Catalyst June 1996. p. 1.
[260pp69]. League Protest of “The Last Supper” Pays Off. Catalyst June 1996. p. 4.
[260pp70]. AP Red Flags Catholic Religion. Catalyst June 1996. p. 13.
[260pp71]. New England Chapter Helps Save EWTN. Catalyst June 1996. p. 13.
[260pp72] League Pressures N.Y. Store To Remove Offensive Creche. Catalyst January-February 1995. p. 1.
[260pp73]. Hard Rock Hotel in Las Vegas Offends Catholics. Catalyst December 1995. p. 4.
[260pp74]. Why is the Hard Rock Hotel Offending Catholics? Catalyst December 1995. p. 5.
[260pp75]. Hard Rock Hotel in Las Vegas Offends Catholics. Catalyst December 1995. p. 4.
[260pp76]. Hard Rock Hotel Pulls Altar. Catalyst January-February 1996. p. 6.
[260pp77]. Pope Defamed at New Jersey State College. Catalyst September 1994. p. 1.
[260pp78]. University of Michigan Cartoon Draws Swift League Response. Catalyst March 1995. p. 11.
[260pp79]. University of Michigan Cartoonist Apologizes. Catalyst April 1995. p. 2.
[260pp80]. Nazi Slur of Vatican Implicates Congressmen. Catalyst July-August 1995. p. 1.
[260pp81]. Senator Inouye Resigns From Population Institute After League Protest. Catalyst September 1995. p. 4.
[260pp82]. Protest Stirs ADL to Restore Prize to Author. Catalyst May 1996. p. 6.
[260pp83]. League Assails Clinton Administration for Bigotry. Catalyst October 1994. p. 1.
[260pp84]. Open Letter To The President. This half-page ad sponsored by the Catholic League ran in all editions of The New York Times on August 29, 1994. Catalyst October 1994. p. 8.
[260pp85]. Donohue W. The Holy See, Cairo and The Pundits. Catalyst October 1994. p. 11.
[260pp86]. Donohue W. We’ve Only Just Begun. Catalyst January-February 1995. p. 3.
[260pp87]. Elder’s Exit Applauded. Catalyst January-February 1995. p. 4.
Dr Stephen D Mumford is the founder and president of the North Carolina-based The Center for Research on Population and Security. His principal research interest is the relationship between world population growth and national and global security. This interest, pursued for over four decades, first developed during a tour of military duty in Asia, where he first recognized the linkage between political stability and population pressures. He obtained his master’s in public health and his doctorate in population studies from the University of Texas. Using church policy documents and writings of the Vatican elite, Dr Mumford has introduced research showing the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church as the principal power behind efforts to block the availability of contraceptive services worldwide.




NewsBusters' Pierre Still Dishonestly Shielding Catholic Church From Priest Abuse Scandal

Dave Pierre is NewsBusters' resident apologist for the sexual abuse conducted by Catholic Church priests, even going so far as to claim that one bishop's paying off abusive priests rather than subjecting them to the criminal justice system was "fast and economical."
Pierre is at it again in an Aug. 12 NewsBusters post proclaiming that former Milwaukee Archbishop (and current cardinal and head of the New York City diocese) was vindicated over a judge's ruling that the creation of a cemetery trust fund that effectively shielded more than $50 million from exposure to lawsuits from victims of abusive priests was permitted. Pierre insists that "Dolan created the trust for the explicit purpose of protecting donors' donations and having them used as they were intended – for the care of over 100 Catholic cemeteries in the archdiocese."
Pierre didn't mention that Dolan specifically stated that he created the trust fund because "I foresee an improved protection of these funds from any legal claim and liability," which would seem to belie any vindication Pierre is claiming. Just because Dolan's creation of the fund is legally permitted doesn't mean that shielding the funds from abuse lawsuits wasn't a motivation for creating it.
Pierre then turns his venom on David Clohessy, head of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, calling him "nasty" and a "bigot."

Newark archbishop strikes back at critics, says 'God will surely address them in due time'

The Star-Ledger
Myers' letter to priests of the archdiocese
Myers' 2010 deposition related to a lawsuit in the Diocese of Peoria
Myers' letter thanking Maloney for his 'much-loved' camera
Myers thanks Maloney for the 'wonderful gift'
Myers' thank-you letter indicating he will gamble at the dog track
Myers thanks Maloney for 'your most generous gift,' invites him to Florida
Myers thank-you letter for a silver object
Myers invites Maloney to Crete
Myers assures a parishioner Maloney has not been accused of impropriety
By Mark Mueller/The Star-Ledger
on August 20, 2013

NEWARK — In a sharply worded offensive, Newark Archbishop John J. Myers lashed out at the media and his critics in a letter released over the weekend, saying he has been the target of "deceitful and misleading" information about his oversight of sexually abusive priests.
Myers, who has limited his public comments in the face of recent scandals, took broad aim in the letter, addressed to priests of the archdiocese and distributed to parishioners at weekend services in Essex, Union, Bergen and Hudson counties.
In addition to the media, he questioned the motivations of politicians and former or retired clergy members who have spoken out against him, terming them "traveling bandwagons" and suggesting they have a prejudiced and spiteful view of the Roman Catholic faith. He suggested, too, they would be judged by God.
"For any who set out to claim that I or the Church have had no effective part in the love and protection of children, is simply evil, wrong, immoral, and seemingly focused on their own self-aggrandizement," Myers wrote. "God only knows their personal reasons and agenda. We are still called to love them. And God will surely address them in due time."
Myers wrote the letter in response to newspaper and television reports last week about a $1.35 million legal settlement reached between the Diocese of Peoria, Ill., and the family of a man who contends an Illinois priest abused him as a child in 1995 and 1996.


Dissident anti-Catholic National Catholic Reporter gets $2.3 million to cover LCWR controversy

LifeSite News  (a Vatican Pied Piper)
Fri Aug 23, 2013
KANSAS CITY, August 23, 2013 ( – The Kansas-based National Catholic Reporter (NCR), the U.S.’s most notorious dissenting Catholic newspapers, has been granted $2.3 million to cover religious sisters, including the ongoing conflict between the Vatican and the far-left Leadership Conference of Women Religious.
The money comes from the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, Catholic News Agency reports today, in a grant intended to create “a global sisters’ net.”
In a policy paper dated February this year, Brad Myers, senior program officer, wrote that sisters are a central interest to the Foundation, having taught Conrad Hilton in his childhood.
“The idea is a website devoted to the coverage of Catholic sisters globally,” Myers told CNA. “Initially our focus is going to be on issues facing Catholic sisters in the United States and Africa. Ultimately we do have global ambitions. We have stronger networks between these two countries, so that’s where we’ll start.”


This is as far as Bill Donohue dared to mention -  in passing - the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation


January 25, 2012 by Bill League president Bill Donohue comments on an aspect of Warren Buffett’s finances not ordinarily discussed:

Warren Buffett’s comment that the rich should pay higher taxes, now enshrined by President Barack Obama as the “Buffett Rule,” is drawing much applause. What is not being discussed is the billionaire’s support for anti-Catholicism. First some background information.

Over several decades, Buffett has spent a fortune funding radical abortion organizations like NARAL and Planned Parenthood; he has lavishly given money to train a new generation of abortion physicians; he has spent millions to help RU-486 (the abortion-inducing drug) to win FDA approval; and he gave his pro-abortion, population-control friends at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation nearly $31 billion in 2006 for more of the same. There’s nothing anti-Catholic about any of this, but when he intentionally seeks to subvert Catholicism by dishonestly funding pro-abortion organizations that have hijacked the Catholic name, that’s another story.

To be specific, Buffett has given hundreds of millions over the years to anti-Catholic front groups like Catholics for Choice (formerly Catholics for a Free Choice) and its sister organization in Latin America, Catholics for the Right to Decide. In 2010, the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation alone gave $759,822 to the former, and almost $1.7 million to the latter. These letter-head organizations wouldn’t exist if they depended on donations from members—they don’t have any—they exist because of the likes of Warren Buffett.
If Buffett, or someone like him, were to throw millions upon millions funding Jews for Jesus, what would the Jewish community call him? Now you know why Warren Buffett has earned the tag anti-Catholic.

BOYCOTT Oratory of Saint Joseph! CANDLES to giant Zeus statues of St. Joseph and Brother Andre cannot protect children from CSC pedophiles

Oratory of SaintJoseph pedophile priests! Montreal: Second class-action suit targets Congrégation de Ste-Croix! Saints and Holy Cross cannot protect children!

Oratoire Saint-Joseph du Mont-Royal - Montreal.jpg

Vatican Billions: its history, sources, and assets today worldwide. BOYCOTT the Vatican Museum and boycott ALL donations to the Vatican Catholic Church Reign of Terror