Note: All underlined words are links to supporting articles. Click the links to see the supporting articles. The articles linked near the end of the post are important, because they demonstrate that Archbishop Niederauer is a progressive, "gay-friendly", Catholic bishop who has endorsed Brokeback Mountain, is soft on homosexual adoption, defended a priest who preyed on teenaged boys, has been slippery about Nancy Pelosi's pro-abortion stance, and has refused to deny Ms. Pelosi Holy Communion.
I watched the O'Reilly Factor's exposition of The San Francisco Sacrilege, which involved the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" being given Holy Communion by San Francisco Archbishop, George Niederauer.
You can watch the story, which was covered in two segments on Friday, October 12, 2007, at the top of the show:
First Segment: Talking Points Memo
Second Segment: San Francisco Values?
I was disappointed to hear Mr. O'Reilly turn the entire story into a critique of San Francisco politicians, but not because those politicians don't deserve criticism. They do. Nancy Pelosi marched in a "Gay Pride" parade alongside Harry Hay, "a fierce advocate of man/boy love". Click here: When Nancy Met Harry
San Francisco politicians also deserve criticism for allowing events featuring criminal acts involving public nudity and public sexual contact in full view of minor children, like those that occur at the Folsom Street Fair, to take place without police intervention.
I was disappointed because Mr. O'Reilly gave Archbishop Niederauer a complete pass, and the most charitable reason I can offer is that he covered the story without looking any deeper into the situation. O'Reilly is either unaware of or completely ignored evidence of Archbishop Niederauer's progressive, "gay-friendly" agenda – an agenda I will document below.
Look, there is honestly no way that Archbishop Niederauer didn't know that men in drag were presenting themselves for Holy Communion in protest of Church teaching.
Homosexuals have been protesting at Catholic Mass for a long, long time. I was stunned to hear O'Reilly say he'd never heard of anything like it. I have, and it was much worse.
The militant homosexual group, ACT-UP, organized it's first "Stop the Church" protest on December 10, 1989 at St. Patrick's Cathedral, in New York. It was estimated that 4,500 ACT-UP and WHAM! members gathered outside St. Patrick's Cathedral to protest the Catholic Church's perceived "homophobia", and Church teaching with respect to so-called "safe sex education" and legal, elective abortion. 111 activists were arrested at the event. Some activists entered St. Patrick's Cathedral, and interrupted Mass. These activists threw used condoms at the altar, chained themselves to the pews, chanted slogans during the Mass and/or blocked the aisles by laying down on the floor. At least one member of ACT-UP received Holy Communion and spat out the Sacred Host in an act of protest against Catholic teaching on matters of sexual morality.
I'm surprised Mr. O'Reilly doesn't remember this, given the fact that the event received wide media coverage which, rightly, did not reflect well on ACT-UP. Here is the New York Times story on changes in tactics within ACT-UP as a result of the protest: Rude, Rash, Effective, Act-Up Shifts AIDS Policy
There are other homosexual activists who protest Catholic teaching using the Holy Eucharist during Mass to get attention. The Rainbow Sash Movement is another such group, and their activities have been well publicized in Catholic circles. "[Rainbow Sash Movement] members wear a 2-inch wide ribbon of rainbow colors across their shoulders (a symbol of the modern homosexual movement). They then present themselves to receive communion in Cathedrals and parishes across the nation in protest against the Catholic teaching that those who publicly and stubbornly persist in living in serious sin, or in promoting heretical teachings, may, and should be denied Communion by the minister of Communion." They generally do this on Pentacost Sunday each year. The Rainbow Sash Movement has been criticized by Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, who said they should be denied Holy Communion, and embraced by liberal prelates like Cardinal Roger Mahony, whose close friendship with Archbishop Niederauer dates back from their time together at St. John's Seminary.
All of that being said, this is the angle O'Reilly neglected: There is tension within the Catholic Church between "progressive" priests and bishops, who are at odds with Catholic teaching on homosexuality, and orthodox priests and bishops who support authentic Catholic teaching on human sexuality. This editorial by Matt Abbott is an indication of that: The ‘Rainbow Sash Movement’ Controversy
Perhaps Mr. O'Reilly is unaware of these things, despite being a professed Catholic.
Still, there were a number of things Mr. O'Reilly left out of his report, possibly because he is not aware of them, but it was still disappointing, given Mr. O'Reilly's abilities and resources which should have enabled him to provide thorough coverage of the San Francisco Sacrilege.
Here are a few examples of the ways in which Mr. O'Reilly's coverage was deficient:
Claims that Archbishop Niederauer is simply a doddering old man who was easily confused are specious, at best. Niederauer could not possibly have been confused about the fact that men dressed as women wearing religious ornamentation presented themselves to receive the Most Holy Eucharist. One of the men was clearly wearing a headdress that was a modified version of those worn by traditional nuns. Both men were wearing clown make-up and were clearly presenting themselves as men dressing as women.
Moreover, the Archdiocese knows about the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and knows of their involvement at Most Holy Redeemer Parish, which is known for its homosexual-friendly atmosphere and involvement in homosexual activism.
Most Holy Redeemer Parish had a booth at the Folsom Street Fair and has participated in "gay pride" events for many years.
I must warn you that parts of this linked YouTube video detailing Most Holy Redeemer Parish involvement in a "pride" parade are obscene. (Note: Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, makes an appearance): "Gay Pride" in the Archdiocese of San Francisco
Bill O'Reilly was wrong to let Archbishop Niederauer off the hook, because Niederauer is a progressive, "gay-friendly", Catholic bishop. Here's evidence:
Bill O'Reilly has done a lot to expose people who hurt children. Here' why I'm surprised he was so quick to give Niederauer a pass:
I'm also surprised that Mr. O'Reilly used video in his report that exposed Niederauer's comments about giving Holy Communion to Nancy Pelosi, but neglected to correlate Niederauer's soft stance on Pelosi's well known pro-abortion stance with a progressive agenda on Niederauer's part. That's hard to overlook. I suspect he ignored it because he was forcing the story to fit an angle, but his angle focused on San Francisco politics, and Pelosi was mentioned in his story. It really does seem O'Reilly deliberately ignored evidence that Niederauer did something wrong.
For the original video, used by the O'Reilly Factor, which was not made by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to embarrass Archbishop Niederauer, but rather, by an organization which sought to expose the corrupting influence of those sympathetic to the homosexual agenda within the San Francisco Archdiocese, click here: Video: Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence"
The article that broke the story, including revealing links that demonstrate the depth of the corruption that fomented the San Francisco Sacrilege: More San Francisco Nuttiness: Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous 'Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence'
Contact Mr. O'Reilly: Oreilly@foxnews.com
Ask him to dig deeper and let the public know about these other factors.