Bill Donohue Has Become America’s Chief Apologist For Catholic Priest Sexual Misconduct, Says TWO
BURLINGTON, Vt. – Truth Wins Out today condemned The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue after he tried to scapegoat gay men for Catholic clergy sexual abuse scandals in a full-page New York Times ad. Donohue’s full-throated defense and attempt to blame others highlights Donohue’s role as chief apologist for the unthinkable crimes committed against young people at the hands of trusted clergy in the Catholic Church.
In the New York Times ad titled Straight Talk About The Catholic Church, Donohue attempted to distract Americans from problems with the Catholic Church’s poor handling of many abuse cases by saying that “the issue is homosexuality, not pedophilia.” Interestingly, Donohue never tried to explain why there isn’t an avalanche of multi-million dollar sexual abuse lawsuits in LGBT neighborhoods, churches, and community centers – as there are in Catholic dioceses.
“Bill Donohue’s blame game is a disgraceful attempt to deflect criticism from the Catholic Church’s poor handling of many sexual abuse cases against minors,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “He ought to be ashamed of himself for serving as an apologist for gross misdeeds in the Catholic Church. Instead of showing humility, Donohue is trying to humiliate and bully abuse victims and look for scapegoats.”
Aside from attacking the LGBT community, The Catholic League’s ad pointed fingers at the Orthodox Jewish Community and the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). Indeed, Donohue had the nerve to write in the ad that SNAP was “a professional victims’ group” that “are dogmatic in their convictions; their hatred of the Catholic Church palpable.”
“It takes real courage to come forward and share testimony about sexual abuse,” said TWO’s Besen. “Bill Donohue’s attack on these survivors is mean-spirited, cruel and shows a genuine lack of compassion. Once again, Bill Donohue is placing church politics above the harm suffered by real people at the hands of Catholic priests.”
Truth Wins Out is a non-profit organization that fights anti-LGBT religious extremism. TWO specializes in turning information into action by organizing, advocating and fighting for LGBT equality.
data=”http://www.youtube.com/v/2j8PemrX5DA?fs=1″>You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
TWO might consider lodging a complaint with New York Times top editors about the paper running an ad that contains support for anti-gay hate speech. For Donohue to buy his way into the pages of the New York Times, promulgating anti-gay hate speech is unacceptable on both sides; Donohue’s and the Times’. Equating pedophiles to homosexuals, and stating outright that all homosexuals are pedophiles, (“the problem is homosexuality”) is defamation. It is not acceptable for the New York Times to take money and then provide to the person giving the paper the money space to defame gay people as a group.
What Scott said.
So if a male priest abuses a young girl, is that homosexuality?
Church hierarchy tried to blame all the sexual abuse of children on those with a homosexual orientation some time back. I don’t remember if it was before or after the “blame it on the devil” excuse was floated. Neither one floated very well with Catholics
.
Are the hierarchs now using What’s his name as their shill? I hope What’s his name had to pay a bundle for his ad in the Times.
How many times must it be said that the sexual abuse of anyone, and in particular of children, is fundamentally an abuse of power and authority and in the case of religious denominations and organizations it becomes abuse of children, young women, men and vulnerable adults through the spiritual power and authority the individual holds.
What neither What’s his name nor any of the hierarchs have addressed, at least publicly, is their own and/or their predecessors’, involvement in protecting and covering up for sexual predators while victims got the short shrift.
Perhaps that may change with the calls for the resignation of the Cardinal Archbishop of Philadelphia. Justin Rigali has managed to show just about all the holes in the Dallas Charter with the release of Philly’s second Grand Jury Report, the five arrests that followed and the almost thirty priests who were taken out of ministry.
Msgr. William Lynn and the other four who were arrested will have their formal arraignments on Friday, April 15th at 11:00 A.M. in the Criminal Justice Center in center city Philly.
There will be a rally with protest signs beginning at 9:30 A.M. or so in front along with press conferences outside after the formal arraignments. JOIN US.
BTW, when is the topic of disciplining complicit bishops and others going to be the subject of the bishops’(USCCB) meetings?
FYI -
Also, check your Comcast Network Channel on Wednesday, April 13th at 5:30 P.M. for Larry Kane’s “Voice of Reason” show on the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims’ Advocate
maturlishmdsnd@yahoo.com
I was part of a panel discussion recently on the situation in the Philadelphia Archdiocese that has resulted from the recently released second grand jury report, the five arrests that followed and the suspensions of almost thirty priests.
Back in March I was invited by PA Representative Michael McGeehan to speak at the March 1st press conference at the state capitol in Harrisburg where House Bills 832 and 878 were introduced. Those bills will, if they become law, (832) remove all criminal and civil statutes of limitation going forward and provide a two year civil window (878) for bringing forward previously time barred cases of sexual abuse by anyone.
These bills are very similar to the 2007 legislation which provided similar civil legislation in Delaware. The criminal statutes had been removed going forward a few years before that.
The show, “Voice of Reason” is hosted by Larry Kane of the Comcast Network and was taped a few weeks ago in their Philadelphia studios. In addition to my participation, the others on the panel included an adult “alleged” victim of childhood sexual abuse, his father and Anne Shenberger, a member of the Philadelphia Archdiocese’s Review Board.
The show was broadcast on the Comcast Network, CN 8 and 201 on Sunday, April 10th at 9:30 P.M. and will be repeated on Wednesday, April 13th at 5:30 P.M. The Comcast Network is also available on Fios.
The audio is already available if you click on:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/show/kyw-specials-place/#
Then click on:
Sex abuse
On what does Donohue blame the cover-up of the abuse, the systematic enabling and protecting of perpetrator priests over many decades, centuries?
Is that the fault of gays as well?
Donohue is one sick man.
does anyone know what kind of degree good old Bill has? to me he has not had any psychology classes. Philadelphia is NOT caused by homosexuality but a person that wants power and control…it has NOTHING to do with sex..god I am so tired of these right wingers state things that are not even true..they need to get their facts straight.
Silas, religious people don’t need “degrees” they have God.
Um, Silas…”Philadelphia”?
With respect, how do you explain that approximately 85% of the clerical sexual abuse has been male-on-male other than homosexual clergy?
John, pedophiles aren’t attracted to adults, secondary sexual characteristics turn them off. They are attracted to the smooth hairless bodies and as such gender doesn’t matter to them. Priests abuse mostly boys because that’s the gender they are given access to – most people keep their young girls away from men. Its a crime of opportunity as much as anything else.
John, you’re talking about people who are only attracted to children. Also, most likely, these priests have more access to little boys than to little girls.
And, the scandal was not about the sex, it was about the cover-up. Had these priests been turned over to the authorities there would have been no scandal. But, instead, the abuse was covered up and the priests moved to another parish so that they could abuse more children–that’s where the scandal came from.
Also, this abuse didn’t just start in the 60s–though Donohue and others tried to act like it was the loosening of public morals that caused it. This abuse goes back far before that–it’s just that it wasn’t until the 70s that people started talking about it so that the people who were abused realized that it wasn’t their fault, they weren’t alone and that it was the priests and those in the church who facilitated them who were at fault.
Priya, Probably priests do have somewhat more access to boys, but if gender doesn’t matter to them, why 80-85% male-on-male?
Daniel, It seems to me that the scandal is about both the abuse and the unconscionable cover-up and reassignment.
John Dearie, Sr.-Where are you getting your statistics? Please cite where this 80-85% number comes from. I ask this because SNAP has gone on record as saying that it’s actually 50/50 male/female victims. Since they are the ones actually working with victims, I am more inclined to accept their numbers.
Nick, From years of following the scandal. In his ad yesterday, Donahue cites the 2004 National Review Board report figure of 80%. While both males and females have been abused, I have never seen it argued that it has been 50/50.
The bottom line is this article is making the Catholic church look more guilty of man-boy sex, regardless of how it’s verbally packaged.
Tho I get the importance of separating mos w peds, that dead horse has been beat’in ad nauseum.
The church is a hypocritical spin doctor factory and does have a problem w mos, and ality. Let them continue to bring down their own circus tent w more ads on how homo and pedo/manboy they are. The more talk about mos in the clergy, the faster it will happen.
Ahh-men
John Dearie–the scandal would not have happened had the church turned these pedophiles over to the authorities. They would have been isolated incidents. The scandal comes with the cover up. The scandal always comes with the cover up.
Scandals are allegations that damage reputations. This scandal started via a lawsuit(s), the coverup info came later and elevated the already existing scandal.
Also-and I admit this is purely speculative on my part-pedophiles don’t necessarily engage in penetrative sex, where gender might be relevant. It’s often other forms of sexual abuse, which they may justify as being “harmless”(and harder to prove).
Bill Donohue knows that the reason that boys are most of the victims is that no catholic parent in their right mind lets their daughter alone with a priest. the male victims are mostly alter boys and of the age where they “GROOM” you for the priesthood. easy access.
John,
I am a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I would like to ask you to tread more carefully. Also, since April is National Child Abuse Prevention and Sexual Assault Awareness Month (http://www.stopitnow.org/latest_news_april_campaign) I would doubly request that you step back from your talking points and more fully educate yourself before stepping into the fray.
Please take the time to read this article which separates facts from myths and clarifies the language and proper terminologies regarding the sexual abuse of children:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
I am a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and my abuser identifies as a heterosexual male. The trap you’re falling into is thinking that sexual abuse is about sex in the sense that adults think of it. It’s not. As has been pointed out here and countless other times: sexual abuse is about power, often about violence, and always about exploiting a child’s vulnerability. It is also always about the very real psychological problems of the perpetrator. Many abusers never form adult sexual identities due to a variety of psychological problems and, consequently, they are largely incapable of forging healthy adult intimate relationships with either gender. So identifying their sexual orientation is nowhere near as simple as Donohue and his ilk would have us believe.
Yes, sexual abuse involves the sex organs but that’s where the similarities end between sexual abuse and the loving, mutual, intimate sex act between consenting adults. So, yes, the equipment is the same but it’s an entirely different result. As someone once said: You don’t hit someone over the head with a frying pan and call it cooking.
Child sexual abuse is an incredibly complex subject to discuss due in no small part to the careless tossing around of words that most people don’t fully understand in context. Please don’t add to this confusion and misinformation by referring to the perpetrator of male-male childhood sexual abuse as “homosexual”. It muddies the waters, whether deliberately or unintentionally, and it makes it impossible for people to have a rational discussion about the subject. Read the article linked above and try to be more mindful before speaking or writing on the subject.
Child sexual abuse is a terrible but all too common thing. Conservative estimates are that 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys are sexually abused (http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/pages/child_sexual_abuse.asp). We also know that these numbers are low because only about 1 in 10 children who are sexually abused will actually disclose the abuse.
The thing I want, and the the thing I hope you want, is to ultimately end all abuse of children. That’s only going to happen if we can let go of our biases and focus on the facts and, most importantly, the well being of the children. Placating a religious agenda when discussing sexual abuse of children is not only disingenuous it’s downright dangerous. We need to dialogue openly and *accurately* if we want to fully protect children from abuse. Labeling males who sexually abuse male children as “homosexuals” is woefully inaccurate and overly simplistic. It’s also insulting to adult gay men who have healthy same sex attractions only to other adults (and who are as repulsed by people sexually abusing children as any other healthy adult). And, most important, this linguistic sleight of hand will mislead the public about the nature of the very *real* threat to our children.
If we just teach the public that “homosexuals” are the threat then I guarantee that abuse will continue and we will have done our children a terrible injustice. There are lots of very good, well studied, well documented signs to help us identify potential abusers. Start here: http://www.stopitnow.org/warnings
Demonizing gay men will not protect children more effectively.
the catholic church of the united states has had sex scandals since the begining of the 20th century. it was so bad they changed canon law so as to seperate the vows of celibacy and chastity depending on the age of the child you raped.
look it up.
Recommendation for a great new book, for anyone interested in the Catholic clergy abuse situation:
Clergy Sexual Abuse Litigation – Survivors Seeking Justice, by Jennifer M. Balboni,
http://www.FirstForumPress.com
Years ago, I coined a phrase to describe sexual predators within the ranks of catholic clerics who sexually abused innocent children — I called them dysfunctional sex freaks. I stand by the phrase based on the sick and dehumanizing way innocent children were treated by catholic priests, nuns, bishops, cardinals and popes. Covering up for dysfunctional sex freaks, in my eyes, makes these individuals dysfunctional sex freaks as well. Bill Donohue, you be the judge, are you too, a dysfunctional sex freak?
Mike Ference
John said “Probably priests do have somewhat more access to boys, but if gender doesn’t matter to them, why 80-85% male-on-male?”.
I don’t buy this 80-85% figure but in any event priests all have free and easy access to altar boys and no access to girls. Its a crime of opportunity.
Hey Bill… It was holy catholic priests who could not “keep their hand off children”
They are child predators…and that is a CRIME..
IDavid, b******t. The scandal came as it was revealed the breadth of the coverup. Had they turned over these priests to the authorities the scandal wouldn’t have happened.
Daniel. Your def of scanbal differs from Websters, so I see where you are coming from. But the scandal actually came from the amount of lawsuits coming forward all at once, and the magnitude of the settlements. So I’ll stick w the trad def of scandal as it serves more people equally. Yours is a bit sketchy and unclear.
PS “turning over priests to authorities” immediately does not nor would not have made the issue any less a scandal.
iDavid, from the comments I have gotten from the former Catholics (all with fairly young kids I should add) who are now members of my church, Daniel was right. They tell me that they knew that, sadly, in a church with thousands of priests, there would be bad men, and that in of itself did not indict the church. But, the sense that it was hidden, and the rumors (proven in so, so many a diocise to be correct) that “troubled priests” were not treated as criminals, but ‘treated’ and then sent to OTHER parishes, WAS the great cause of the scandal.
The many (many) former Catholics who have left the denomination for other denominations, including my own have told me that Daniel was largely correct.
The denominations reputation was already pretty much shot for a lot of the public. The Scandal was the thing that was, well, scandalous…that abuse not only occured, but was HIDDEN.
In any case, Donohue needs an education, and to stop pointing the finger where it does not belong. What he is doing is called ‘false witness’, and, it is a sin.
Donahue and Karl Rove look like they were separated at birth.
pc..the irony here is that despite donahue’s efforts, the catholic laity are more supportive of gay equality and marriage than many other christian denominations. Go figure.
Hi Gene,
As a Catholic myself, I have followed this entire debacle quite closely and politely disagree. A scandal does not need a coverup to be a scandal. An illicit affair of a politician is a scandal, whether he moved his man/woman to different addresses to deceive the public or not.
Just getting caught w pants down in priest boy sex is a scandal by definition, whether or not the priest wore different wigs to hide his identity.
I’m saying that is the base point from which all other intensified scandal snowballed from. Either way I think we’ve clarified our positions. Onward ho.
Hello idavid. Clarified, and I am good with moving forward. While not a member (or in agreement with) your denomination, and dont’ understand how a gay person (I assume you are gay) can remain a member of it, to each their own. I have many friends who are Roman Catholic, and many are, as Gary pointed out, very supportive go gay rights. Onward ho (hopefully, your not calling me a ‘ho’ lol :)
Looking back at all this, once this scandal became international news, the Vatican immediately instructed all seminaries to develop criteria for “weeding” out perceived or would be gay seminarians from entering the priesthood. Now that we know there were a substantial number of post pubescent females molested as well as boys, what is the criterion for weeding out the straight offenders? Not once has Donohue denigrated, villified or dehumanized any of the straight offenders or straights in general. This is clearly an attack on all gay people, painting us with the same brush. I would love to know the government statistics on sexual assault and the gender of their victims. I wouldn’t mind betting the result would be overwhelming slanted towards straights as the perpetrators. For Donohue to claim that most or all gays are pedophiles, in this case it should be more accurately referred to as pederasts, I wonder if he would classify all straights as rapists since the bulk of rape crimes are committed by straight men against women?
Has anyone ever established whether or not Mr. Donahue, is “A Prophet for Profit” Many “Right-wing Catholics” will support any cause or anyone, who they perceive is standing up for a poor, media-abused Church. After all, the Church has been maligned for centuries over her barbaric stand in the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Persecution of the Jews, the persecution of women in witchcraft trials, etc. According to the Church’s stance, She was just doing the will of the Lord, which most people with a modicum of spiritual and common sense would call Her lame defense, “Bull****!” How much does Bill Donahue make a year for stirring up old, rich Catholics (question mark broken)! He is a class act, but being a lady, I’m not going to identify it. I’ll let you judge for yourselves!
You sohuld all take a look at the john Jay reports. Google it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abuse_by_members_of_Roman_Catholic_orders
No. 6, Silas…archbigot, twice married Donohue has a Ph.D. in sociology, supposedly, his only claim as an “authority” on the issue. He dismisses the APA’s statements on sexual orientation I might add.
No. 34, I’ve no doubt he’s a prophet for profit. His full-page spread cost more than $4,000 to print. Maybe the Knights of Columbus funded it as they did when they donated more than $1 million to support Prop. 8 in California. Maybe they’re funding him, period.
Hello JeannieGuzma…GOOD QUESTION.
One, the nasty old bigot has celebrated the Catholic Sacrament of Divorce, after having two kids. Whats the term? Oh yes…’f*****g hypocrit’
Two, his salary in 2009 was a humble, Christlike 399,159.00 $ Yes gay boys and girls, you read that right. Three hundred and ninety nine thousand, one hundred and fifty nine dollars.
His group of professional Cathoic victims, which is a 501(c) charity, in a world of starving children, and where Roman Catholic dioceses are filing for bankruptcy because of all the money they owe victims of the sex abuse scandals (male and female victims by the way) is sitting on a “mere” 26.2 million in assets.
Assuming a return of 5 %, thats 1.31 million a year they can use to hurt us. I suppose we should be happy that they are damn fools that they pay this bloated maggot a hair under $ 400,000 a year.
Let $ to pay to spread lies about and hurt us.
News Flash Donahue!:
President of the Catholic League for Religious Cult Leaders and Their Predators.
Put the those shoes on Donahue, they are just your size and brand.
Why pretend you are flying around via a halo? Did you think no one would recognize you?
Didn’t Kathy Griffin “out” the catholic league, as only Bill and his computer?
[...] leaders appear just as hapless and empty. For instance, the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue has embraced his role as chief apologist for the unthinkable crimes committed against young people at the hands of [...]
Gene,
No I wasn’t calling you a ho. I don’t know you well enough to do that. ;) I was raised Catholic, alter boy etc, but to clarify, I am an ex-Catholic and have considered startinwritweb sight where Catholics can formally attest their renunciation of the church in writing, forwarding it to the Vatican. It actually helped my break from the church by executing a formal document. I hope this clarifies any confusion about hos and church membership.
John Dearie: It sounds like you are implicitly referring to the 2004 John Jay Report. This report did indeed find that 81% of the victims were boys, as well as some other interesting things:
- 23% of the victims were 10 or younger; 51% were between 11 and 14; 26% were between 15 and 17.
- 56% had 1 reported allegation against them; 27% had 2 or 3 allegations against them; 14% had 4 to 9 allegations against them; 3% had 10 or more allegations against them. This last 3% were responsible for nearly 3,000 of the estimated 11,000 victims, or 27% of the total number of reported allegations.
- 50% of the abusers were age 35 or younger at the time of their first alleged abuse.
- 70% of abusers were ordained prior to 1970, which means they attended pre-Vatican II seminaries (VC2 changes in seminaries occurred post-1970).
- Most of the alleged abuse involved verbal harassment and/or physical touching; 27% involved abuse using oral sex; 25% involved abuse using or the attempted performance of anal sex.
The stats from this study go on and on. What this all tells me is that the abusers were composed of pedophiles and others who while not technically classified as pedophiles, were so sexually immature in their own minds as to seek gratification from a minor instead of seeking out an adult. If homosexuality is part of this it would appear to be “situational homosexuality”, i.e. exactly what one finds in prisons. Priests had more contact and access with boys, not girls. That’s a fact.
Oh one more thing: the fact that 70% of the abusers were ordained prior to 1970 makes me wonder just how much sex education they received, which is much more than simply the proverbial “birds and the bees”. How many of these abusers also spent their entire formative years in a religious environment, repressing any sexual feelings? It was common for priests back then to attend Catholic HS or a prep school for priestly candidates, attend a Catholic college, enter the seminary, etc. That’s childhood through adolescence and into adulthood with zero time to truly determine if celibacy is what one is called to. No, I’m not blaming the Church’s teaching on celibacy. A small fraction of people are called to this and can live quite satisfying lives being celibate, while most people obviously cannot. I’m referring instead to the pre-Vatican II mindset and atmosphere priestly candidates were brought up in. It worked for most of them but obviously not all.
The diagnostic guideline (DSM-IV-TR) for pedophilia states “generally age 13 years and younger”. That includes 60% of the reported victims in the John Jay study. Also, the International Classification for Diseases states that pedophilia not only involves “prepubescent” children but also “early pubertal” children. Also, a child’s pubescent/pubertal status cannot be determined simply by the child’s age, and the John Jay study had only the child’s age in the reports. Mr. Donohue has no authority to dictate which children were prepubescent and which weren’t. While many children who are age 13 are not prepubescent, pedophiles will still choose the ones that are. Boys in general also mature at a later age than girls. Also, in the proposed upcoming edition of the diagnostic manual, the disorder called “pedophilia” may be replaced with “pedohebephilic dfsorder” which includes abuse not only of prepubescent children but also pubescent children, generally to age 14. Off the top of my head, I think that may be about 75% of the children in the John Jay study. This broader classification (to include children to age 14) has been proposed to help resolve the kind of games that Bill Donohue plays, because clinicians, abusers and the public generally do not make much distinction between prepubescent and pubescent children. Finally, we should remember that the John Jay study only dealt with reported cases, and none of the unreported cases, which perhaps far outnumber the reported ones, and we do not know whether in fact boys simply tended to report the offenses more (or less) than girls did, or whether the priests simply had more ready access to boys than girls, or what. The John Jay study did not study any of that.