Exposed: Gay activist millionaire bankrolled Catholic astroturf group

Kevin Jones of the Catholic News Agency has done us a great service by revealing that Catholics United received almost its entire operating budget in 2012 from the millionaire gay activist Tim Gill:

The Catholics United Education Fund, a Democrat-leaning advocacy group which began criticizing Church opposition to same-sex “marriage” in 2012, received most of its operational budget that year from a gay activist foundation run by influential multi-millionaire Tim Gill.

… Tax forms show the Colorado-based Gill Foundation made a $100,000 grant to the Catholics United Education Fund in 2012 for “general operating support.” The Catholics United Education Fund’s tax forms show that its entire revenue for that year totaled $111,819.

I’ve been sounding the alarm about Catholics United since 2008.


This is the group that, for example, attempted to silence and intimidate priests and bishops from preaching from the pulpit, opposed pro-life efforts, staged a demonstration when Congressman Paul Ryan went to speak at Georgetown, and went after the Knights of Colombus for supporting marriage at the ballot box.

… all while knowingly taking money from a notorious gay activist!

This isn’t the first time Tim Gill has done this. I published an exposé in 2011 that Gill’s foundation had donated almost $100,000 to New Ways Ministry (I guess 100 grand is the going rate for buying a fake Catholic mouthpiece these days). Over the years, Gill has donated tens of millions of dollars to push gay marriage, often through deceitful tactics such as these. It’s fair to assume that Catholics United knew about Gill’s history when they accepted his money.

For as much as gay activists claim that we Catholics are meddling in their affairs when we support laws protecting marriage, isn’t it ironic that gay activists like Gill get a free pass when they secretly fund groups falsely claiming to be Catholic?

Catholics United looks pretty defunct these days. They haven’t been active on social media for a couple months, though they did claim to be looking for a “Pennsylvania organizer” back in April and last month they called on a Catholic school to rehire a gay teacher. It’s hard for me to see Catholics United being able to reactivate without also having to answer questions about these revelations. Certainly the people who work for Catholics United have some explaining to do. They owe an explanation to the Catholics they accused of being shills, for starts.

I’ve always written that Catholics United had a special talent for accusing their opponents of the very things they were guilty of, most often hypocrisy. Individuals who are members of Catholics United or donated to them ought to be asking Tim Gill and the leadership of Catholics United why they tried to hide their association.

And as for the rest of us, the best way we can ensure that we are never deceived by underhanded tactics like those employed by Tim Gill and Catholics United, is to hold fast to the age-old teaching of the church and to listen attentively to the priests and bishops charged with proclaiming it.

Eventually, the truth comes out. I’m glad that today we know more of the truth about one of these fake Catholic organizations.

Now let’s get back to proclaiming the truth.


Categories:American Papist Breaking News

20 thoughts on “Exposed: Gay activist millionaire bankrolled Catholic astroturf group

  1. John Fox says:

    Maybe ‘Catholics United’ should check out Matt 7:3.

  2. Irish Spectre says:

    Boo, Joshua’s point is that Catholics United are fraudulent. You’re saying that NOM is, too, I guess. Well, OK, if that makes you feel better (which is not necessarily to agree with you); but the heart of this “marriage equality” notion is the specious suggestion that there exists some inherent right for sodomites to appropriate the ancient institute of marriage to ostensibly legitimize their unnatural proclivity. Well, try as they might, and they inarguably are having their successes, that doesn’t change a whit the fact that sodomy is and always will be an inherently unclean and unhealthy practice. Their successes also annihilate the underpinnings of any civil proscription against consensual incest, another unhealthy practice, and polygamy, which I do realize is probably fine and dandy by the supporters of marriage equality. If not, then they also are raving hypocrites.

  3. GREG SMITH says:

    Thom~ As you may know, you appeared briefly in a Human Rights Campaign video where they picked up a copy of the NOM 990. They say it shows that about 75% of NOM’s revenue comes from three unknown donors. I understand that the court case in Maine may cause them to be disclosed. Is this basicly correct? If so, I’m not sure there is a lot of difference between NOM being supported by three mega-donors and Catholics United being supported by one major donor.

    1. Joshua Mercer says:

      Except that Catholics United purports to be Catholic and yet receives a lionshare of their money from someone 100% opposed to the Church’s teaching on human sexuality.

      1. Harry Smith says:

        Perhaps Catholics United are the true Catholics as their stances seem to be more in reality, in my opinion. Who said “Who am I to judge?”

        1. Joshua Mercer says:

          The reality is that the union of male and female is a biologically unique coupling — the only coupling capable of creating new human life. To treat this unique coupling exactly like another coupling which cannot create human life is not equality.

          1. Harry Smith says:

            What does that “biologically unique coupling” have to do with the definition of marriage? Answer; nothing. Un-married couples produce babies. Babies can be raised by adults other than their biological mother and father with no negative effects whatsoever. Babies don’t know the difference. If our male God thought marriage of a female and male was that significant, He would have created Eve first and impregnated her to create Adam. I suggest that we treat all married couples with compassion and joy and equality.

        2. Dan says:

          I always prefer the “source” when employing quotes for Christian teaching:.

          Who said ” He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?”

        3. bill says:

          In order to be truly Catholic one most uphold true Catholic teaching which comes from Christ. which by the way has never changed like human opinion. Since much of Canon dogma comes from St. Paul. I would suggest reading it.

  4. Marianne Hospador says:

    Hi Thomas,

    So glad you are back writing. I hope you and your family are doing well. Great expose!
    God bless you.

  5. Rich says:

    The fact that you deleted my comment which exposes the hypocrisy of Peters and NOM is all the proof I need that you are in desperation mode. But do not fear; many other sites have picked up on the lunacy of your contention.

    1. Antonio A. Badilla says:

      Rich, why don’t you attack Peters’ argument rather than him? Is it ever possible not to attack the messenger but his message?

  6. Mike Parnell says:

    Mr. Peters’ hypocrisy is on full display here. The National Organization for Marriage (of which he was a major director) gets most of its money from a handful of wealthy right-wingers. NOM is the group that is failing now. How they can afford Brian Brown’s $500k salary is beyond me. I’d be pretty ticked off a s a supporter of NOM, what with their losing every single legal battle in the past year, and paying their boss this princely sum. Pathetic.

    1. Joshua Mercer says:

      There’s nothing wrong with people donating small or large amount of moneys to an organization they support. But Catholics United purports to be Catholic and yet they receive so much money from someone who is 100% opposed to Church teaching on human sexuality. And that money seemed to make a large impact on their activities because when that money source dried up, CU slowed down considerably.

      1. Boo says:

        And NOM purports to be grassroots when they aren’t and they are slowing down as their money dries up. What’s your point?

        1. Noah says:

          The difference is that NOM did not change there values for the money, whereas, CU has changed their values. They do not promote Catholic teaching in a manner that is consistent with what the church’s stance on many issues.

          1. denise says:

            The problem is, Catholic’s United is using the word Catholic to make it appear as if true practicing Catholics are supporting the policies being pushed. It’s a fraud….

        2. Dan says:

          I think he’s stated the “point” a couple of times, now, Boo.

          “..Catholics United purports to be Catholic and yet they receive so much money from someone who is 100% opposed to Church teaching …”

          I thunk that’s his point.

          Disngenuous for CU to claiming “Catholic” in this matter as their primary source of funding is on record as being diametrically opposed to “Catholic” teaching.

          I got it.

      2. Rich says:

        Joshua, what right do you have to say that Catholics United is not a Catholic organization? You do know that the “Church teaching” to which you refer is under intense scrutiny…within the Church.

        1. Joshua Mercer says:

          The Catechism of the Catholic Church states clearly the Church’s teaching on marriage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



Receive our updates via email.