In this report you will see hacked emails regarding the Catholic Church. One of the most troubling things to me was John Podesta’s relationship with Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, and Catholics United. Two organizations he helped create. The stated purpose of these two groups is to change the direction of the Catholic Church to make its Doctrine more liberal. Especially in regards to abortion, same sex marriage and contraceptives.
In the interest of full disclosure I am not Catholic. I am Southern Baptist. That being said, this working behind the scenes by a political campaign, to try and influence Church Doctrine should be of grave concern to every Christian no matter the Denomination.
Re: opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing . . .
Date: 2012-02-11 11:45
Subject: Re: opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing . . .
We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a
moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now.
Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this
one will have to be bottom up. I'll discuss with Tara. Kathleen
Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.
On 2/10/12, Sandy Newman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi, John,
This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even
> hough 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used
> contraception has me thinking . . . There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in
> which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and
> the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the
> Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could
> happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic
> Hospital Association support of the Administration's new policy, together
> with "the 98%" create an opportunity?
> Of course, this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the
> Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and
> priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc. Even if the idea isn't
> crazy, I don't qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about
> how one would "plant the seeds of the revolution," or who would plant them.
> Just wondering . . .
> Hoping you're well, and getting to focus your time in the ways you want.
> Sandy Newman, President
> Voices for Progress
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) was founded by Tom Periello in 2005. Its chairman is Fred Rotondaro. Both Rotondaro and Periello are senior fellows at the Centre for American Progress, founded by Podesta.
Rotondaro has called for the ordination of women, saying: “I have never seen any rational reason why a woman could not be a priest.” In the same article he says that “Gay sex comes from God”, and asks whether “any practicing Catholic under age 80” agrees with the Church’s teaching on contraception.
Critics have described CACG as a “Trojan Horse” for those who would undermine Church teaching. But its connections to senior figures in the Democrat party, and its intent to change the Church, have not previously been so clear.
Catholics United was also founded in 2005, by Democrat activists Chris Korzen and James Salt.
Catholics United has condemned bishops who deny Communion to politicians who support legal abortion. It describes this as “a shameful attempt to use the Catholic sacrament of Communion as a political weapon.
Re: Conservative Catholicism
To: JPalmieri@americanprogress.org, email@example.com
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism
Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.
Jennifer Palmieri <JPalmieri@americanprogress.org> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.
----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism
Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus.
Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups.
It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
Date: 2008-06-12 12:49
Subject: [big campaignCatholics United Condemns Political Attacks by "Pro-Life" Groups at Meeting of Catholic Bishops
For Immediate Release Contact:
June 12, 2008 James Salt
Catholics United Condemns Political Attacks by "Pro-Life" Groups
Urges "Society for Truth and Justice" and "Operation Rescue" to Abandon
Divisive Campaign and Join Growing Movement for Real Solutions to Abortion
Washington, D.C. - Catholics United today expressed grave concerns over an
ad campaign from the group Society for Truth and Justice and Operation
Rescue founder Randall Terry, which urges the U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops (USCCB) to deny communion to "pro-abortion politicians," and to
condemn Catholics who vote for those same politicians. Catholics United
believes the campaign and an affiliated protest - scheduled for Friday, June
13 at the USCCB's meeting in Orlando - constitute both a shameful attempt to
use the Catholic sacrament of Communion as a political weapon, and a means
of perpetuating decades of the acrimony and division that have prevented
real progress toward ending abortions in the U.S.
Catholics United further called on the Society for Truth and Justice and
Operation Rescue to work with leaders from across the ideological and
political spectrum to craft real solutions to the abortion issue. A growing
body of evidence - including a Catholics United study using data from Kansas
and an upcoming 50-state study by Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
- suggests that providing economic and social supports for pregnant women
and families are the most effective ways to prevent abortions.
"Many of these organizations' supporters are undoubtedly motivated by a
profound and commendable desire to preserve and protect human life at all
stages," said Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United and
co-author of A Nation for All: How the Catholic Vision of the Common Good
Can Save America from the Politics of Division. "Unfortunately, the leaders
of these organizations are pursing strategies that are counterproductive to
their stated objectives. This type of political rhetoric and campaign
intervention is directly responsible for many of the failed policies of the
last decade that have proved to be a disaster - by all reasonable measures -
for human life and dignity."
The ad campaign and USCCB protest are eerily reminiscent of a 2004 concerted
effort by the Republican Party and far right Catholic political
organizations to convince Catholics that Senator John Kerry's position on
abortion rendered him unfit for their vote. Although theologically
inaccurate, this well-funded and well-organized campaign may have been the
decisive factor in securing President Bush's win in Ohio.
"It's time to move beyond the failed policies of the past and address the
real threats to the common good: war, poverty, and lack of health care and
education, the environment, and our dire economic situation," said Korzen.
"It's also time to stop using the abortion issue to divide voters and to
start bringing Americans together around common ground solutions. The
Society for Truth and Justice and Operation Rescue's action are bad for
HRC, Contraceptives, Supreme Court
To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: 2015-11-08 17:47
Subject: HRC, Contraceptives, Supreme Court
I would suggest HRC level a political nuclear blast, ASAP, against a
SupremeCourt decision that could come in June that would end the contraceptive
mandate in ObamaCare. Case is now pending. This is going to be explosive
with women voters as they understand what could happen, with a huge
majority of women strongly supporting contraceptives.
The line is that the current court could put contraceptives under siege, or
if contraceptives prevail in the pending case 5-4 a Republican president
would name one of more justices, if they have a vacancy or two, who would
go after contraceptives.
This is different than the abortion issue. Women overwhelmingly support
contraceptives emotionally and in large majorities, and men also support
contraceptives, and this includes a large majority of Catholic women and
men and moderate evangelicals.
My advice is HRC raise this issue soon, aggressively and visibly. If possible
before the coming Republican debate. This is a powerful, powerful issue.
The real religious issue is that the right wants to impose its sectarian view
of religion on all Americans on contraceptives. A huge and emotional majority
would agree with HRC on contraceptives and the sooner and stronger she
raises this issue, the better, IMO. Brent.
[big campaign] You have got to see this
Date: 2010-03-24 16:38
Subject: [big campaign] You have got to see this
Below is a video report for the flash vigil that Catholics United organized
to support members as they walked into the chamber to vote on Friday. I
want to give a special shout out to Cliff Frazier and Mary Kay Henry for
Video of Catholics United members supporting members of Congress as they
walk into the Capitol building
When we got the word Saturday that the Tea Party activists were hurling
racial and homophobic slurs at members of Congress as they walked into the
House chamber, Catholics United sprang into action. In just 12 hours, we
were able to mobilize 150 people of faith to join in a prayerful peaceful
counter presence outside the Capitol building.
When Speaker Pelosi linked arms with Congressman John Lewis to march into
the Capitol, Catholics United was at their side cheering them on.
And the members of Congress were grateful. As they walked into the chamber
to make their historic vote, many of them stopped to thank us for our
positive and life affirming witness. The highpoint came when a number of
Catholic members of Congress heard about our witness and asked for some of
our signs. A few minutes later, these members of Congress were on the
balcony of the House chamber with our signs, cheering us on.
Our vigil was coverd by CNN, MSNBC, Fox, the Wall Street Journal and many
more news outlets. This was a great day for the American people and I'm
proud that Catholics United was right there helping make it happen. Click
here to see a video compilation from
Catholics United organizing director
Re: Washington Blade Op-Ed: O’Malley’s amnesia on marriage
Date: 2015-04-20 18:11
Subject: Re: Washington Blade Op-Ed: O’Malley’s amnesia on marriage
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Jesse Ferguson <email@example.com>
This makes me happy.
*From:* firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] *On
Behalf Of *Jesse Lehrich
*Sent:* Monday, April 20, 2015 3:58 PM
*Subject:* Washington Blade Op-Ed: O’Malley’s amnesia on marriage
O’Malley’s amnesia on marriage
There he goes again. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who once
extolled the virtues of centrism, now wants us to believe — in an
unintentionally hilarious rewriting of history — that he’s more liberal
than Hillary Clinton and a “profile in courage” when it comes to fighting
for marriage equality.
In a not-so-subtle jab at Clinton, O’Malley in a February speech said,
“History celebrates profiles in courage, not profiles in convenience. The
dignity of every person tells us that the right to marry is not a state
right, it is a human right.”
A Clinton aide last week, responding to a Blade inquiry, affirmed that the
2016 hopeful views same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. That
statement marked a change from her earlier position, articulated in an
infamous NPR interview last year, that she viewed marriage as a state
Clinton, like President Obama and Martin O’Malley and many others evolved
on the issue.
The problem with O’Malley is that he’s had more positions on marriage than
all the 2016 hopefuls combined. And after pushing for civil unions right up
until 2011, he now wants voters to believe that he’s a pioneer on the
issue. What nerve!
Let’s revisit O’Malley’s actual record rather than listen to his calculated
In 2004, O’Malley told a Baltimore TV station, “I’m not opposed to civil
marriages.” Also that year, he emailed a plaintiff in the state marriage
lawsuit that read, “I’m just supporting something I strongly believe in,”
referring to marriage equality. But by 2006, O’Malley’s position was
shifting and he said, “I was raised to believe that marriage is between a
man and a woman. This is a fundamental issue of the state’s public policy,
and a decision that ultimately should not be made by a single trial court
judge.” When confronted by gay activists after issuing that statement,
O’Malley disavowed any previous support of marriage equality.
After a 2007 Maryland court ruling limiting marriage to opposite-sex
couples, O’Malley issued the following statement as heartbroken gay
residents were busy cancelling their weddings and mourning the court’s
misguided decision: “I look forward to reading the court’s full opinion,
but as we move forward, those of us with the responsibility of passing and
enforcing laws have an obligation to protect the rights of all individuals
equally, without telling any faith how to define its sacraments. I respect
the court’s decision.”
Privately, O’Malley had assured gay rights activists and plaintiffs in the
case that he supported marriage equality, only to reverse course and
ultimately invoke his Catholic religious beliefs to justify his support of
From 2008-2010, O’Malley publicly backed civil unions as bills to legalize
marriage equality were defeated in committee. He was even booed off the
stage at a private LGBT donor gathering after advocating for civil unions
over full marriage rights.
In 2011, O’Malley finally said he would sign a marriage bill if passed. “I
have concluded that discriminating against individuals based on their
sexual orientation in the context of civil marital rights is unjust.” That
bill ultimately failed.
It wasn’t until New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo embraced the cause of marriage
equality as a civil rights issue — and well after Maryland Attorney General
Doug Gansler did the same — that O’Malley evolved yet again. Whereas Cuomo
made it clear even before he was elected that he supported full marriage
rights and then lobbied for the needed votes to pass it, O’Malley was —
until 2012 —the reluctant advocate, offering meek, private assurances of
support but refusing to publicly embrace the cause, even after winning a
second term in a landslide.
Though he eventually came around to full support and was instrumental in
preserving the law after it went to referendum, O’Malley was late to the
marriage party and certainly doesn’t deserve credit for its success.
O’Malley has, for years, embodied the poll-driven milquetoast politician
who checks the wind before staking out a position. Now he wants us to
“We have the ability as a party to lead by our principles or are we going
to conduct polls every time we try to determine where the middle is on any
given day,” he told NPR this week.
We should welcome O’Malley’s more progressive positions without forgetting
his disappointing record of saying one thing in private and the opposite
when the cameras are rolling.
*Kevin Naff** is editor of the Washington Blade. Reach him
at firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>.*
- See more at:
Hillary For America