Denver Newsroom, Nov 10, 2020 / 03:00 pm (CNA).- An undercover KGB agent tried to befriend ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick in the early 1980s, prompting the FBI to ask the rising churchman to exploit this connection to counter Soviet intelligence, according to claims in the Vatican’s report on McCarrick released Tuesday.
The Nov. 10 McCarrick Report offers detail on McCarrick’s church career and the sexual abuse his successful personality helped to conceal.
“In the early 1980s, a KGB agent who enjoyed diplomatic cover as the Deputy Chief of Mission to the United Nations for the Soviet Union approached McCarrick, apparently to attempt to befriend him,” said the report, released by the Vatican Nov. 10. “McCarrick, who was initially unaware that the diplomat was also a KGB agent, was contacted by agents of the FBI, who asked him to serve as a counterintelligence asset with respect to the activities of the KGB.”
“Though McCarrick believed it was best to decline such involvement (particularly because he was immersed in the organization of the new Diocese of Metuchen), the FBI persisted, contacting McCarrick again and encouraging him to allow a relationship with the KGB agent to develop,” the report continued.
McCarrick had been an auxiliary bishop of New York City from, and became the first bishop of the newly created Diocese of Metuchen, New Jersey in 1981. He would become Archbishop of Newark in 1986, then Archbishop of Washington in 2001.
In January 1985, McCarrick reported the FBI’s request “in detail” to Apostolic Nuncio Pio Laghi, seeking the nuncio’s advice.
“Laghi thought that McCarrick should ‘not be negative’ about the possibility of serving as an FBI asset and described McCarrick in an internal note as someone who ‘knows how to deal with these people and be cautious’ and who was ‘wise enough to understand and not be caught’,” said the report.
The compilers of the McCarrick Report say the rest of the story is not known to them.
“It is not clear, however, whether McCarrick ultimately accepted the FBI’s proposal, and no record reflects further contact with the KGB agent,” said the report.
Former FBI director Louis Freeh said in an interview cited in the report that he was not personally familiar with the incident. However, he said that McCarrick would have been “a very high value target for any of the (intelligence) services, but particularly the Russians at that time.”
The McCarrick Report cites Freeh’s 2005 book, “My FBI: Bringing Down the Mafia, Investigating Bill Clinton, and Waging War on Terror,” in which he described Cardinal John O’Connor’s “great efforts, prayers and real help to dozens of FBI agents and their families—especially to me.”
“Later, Cardinals McCarrick and Law continued this special ministry to the FBI family, who revered both of them,” Freeh’s book said, referring to former Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Bernard Law.
In the Cold War era, prominent Catholic leaders in the U.S. tended to strongly back the FBI for its work against communism. Cardinal Francis Spellman, who ordained McCarrick to the priesthood in 1958, was a well-known supporter of the FBI, as was Archbishop Fulton Sheen, whom McCarrick came to know after Sheen’s 1969 retirement from the Diocese of Syracuse.
Years after McCarrick’s encounter with the KGB agent and the FBI request for assistance, McCarrick would refer to the FBI anonymous letters which alleged he was engaging in sexual misconduct. He denied these accusations, though his victims who later came forward have indicated he was sexually abusing boys and young men as early as 1970, as a priest of the New York archdiocese.
The McCarrick Report indicates that McCarrick would emphatically deny the allegations, while seeking law enforcement help to respond to them.
In 1992 and 1993 an unknown author or authors circulated anonymous letters to leading Catholic bishops accusing McCarrick of sexual abuse. The letters did not name specific victims or present any knowledge of a specific incident, though they suggested his “nephews”–young men McCarrick frequently singled out for special treatment–were potential victims, the McCarrick Report states.
An anonymous letter sent to Cardinal O’Connor, dated Nov. 1, 1992, postmarked from Newark and addressed to National Conference of Catholic Bishops members, claimed imminent scandal from McCarrick’s misconduct, which it alleged was “common knowledge in clerical and religious circles for years.” The letter claimed that civil charges of “pedophilia or incest” were imminent regarding McCarrick’s “overnight guests.”
After O’Connor sent the letter to McCarrick, McCarrick indicated he was investigating.
“You might want to know that I have shared (the letter) with some of our friends in the FBI to see if we can find out who is writing it,” McCarrick said to O’Connor in a Nov. 21, 1992 response. “I am afraid he is a sick person and someone who has a lot of hate in his heart.”
A Newark-postmarked anonymous letter, dated Feb. 24, 1993 and sent to O’Connor, accused McCarrick of being a “cunning pedophile,” without naming specifics, and also claiming that this had been known for decades by “authorities here and in Rome.”
In a March 15, 1993 letter to O’Connor, McCarrick again cited his consultations with law enforcement.
“When the first letter arrived, after discussion with my vicars general and auxiliary bishops, we shared it with our friends in the FBI and local police,” McCarrick said. “They predicted that the writer would strike again and that he or she was someone whom I may have offended or crossed in some way but someone probably known to us. The second letter clearly supports that supposition.”
The same day, McCarrick wrote to Apostolic Nuncio Archbishop Agostino Cacciavillan, saying anonymous letters were “attacking my reputation.”
“These letters, which presumably are written by the same person, are unsigned and obviously very annoying,” he said. “On each occasion, I have shared them with my auxiliary bishops and vicars general and with our friends in the FBI and the local police.”
The McCarrick Report said that the anonymous letters “appear to have been viewed as libelous attacks made for improper political or personal motives” and did not result in any investigation.
When Pope John Paul II was considering whether to name McCarrick as Archbishop of Washington, Cacciavillan considered McCarrick’s report about the accusations to be a point in McCarrick’s favor. He specifically cited the Nov. 21, 1992 letter to O’Connor.
By 1999, Cardinal O’Connor had come to believe McCarrick might be guilty of some kind of misconduct. He asked Pope John Paul II not to name McCarrick as O’Connor’s successor in New York, citing allegations that McCarrick shared beds with seminarians, among other rumors and allegations.
The report depicts McCarrick as an ambitious workaholic and a cunning personality, at ease in circles of influence and establishing contacts with political and religious leaders. He spoke several languages and would serve on delegations for the Vatican, the U.S. State Department, and NGOs. He would at times accompany Pope John Paul II during his travels.
The new Vatican report indicates McCarrick’s networking included many law enforcement officials.
“During his time as ordinary of the Archdiocese of Newark, McCarrick made numerous contacts in state and federal law enforcement,” said the Vatican report. Thomas E. Durkin, described as McCarrick’s “well-connected New Jersey attorney,” helped McCarrick meet the leaders of the New Jersey State Troopers and the head of the FBI in New Jersey.
A priest who formerly served as a New Jersey police officer said McCarrick’s relationship “was not atypical since relations between the Archdiocese and Newark police have historically been close and cooperative.” McCarrick himself was “comfortable among law enforcement,” according to the McCarrick report, which said his uncle was a captain in his police department and later headed a police academy.
As for McCarrick’s encounter with a KGB agent undercover at the United Nations, the story is just one of many provocative incidents involving the influential churchman.
Monsignor Dominic Bottino, a priest of the Diocese of Camden, described an incident at a catering hall in Newark in January 1990 in which McCarrick appeared to ask his help in obtaining privileged information about bishops’ appointments in the U.S.
Camden’s then-new Bishop James T. McHugh, then-Auxiliary Bishop John Mortimer Smith of Newark, McCarrick, and a young priest whose name Bottino could not recall attended a small dinner in celebration of McCarrick’s consecration of Smith and McHugh as bishops. Bottino was surprised to learn that he had been selected to become an attache at the Holy See’s Permanent Observer Mission to the United Nations.
McCarrick, who appeared to have become inebriated from drinking, told Bottino that the Holy See’s Permanent Observer mission’s diplomatic pouch regularly contained episcopal appointments for U.S. dioceses.
“Placing his hand on Bottino’s arm, McCarrick asked whether he could ‘count on’ Bottino once he became the attaché to provide him with information from the pouch,” the Vatican report said. “After Bottino stated that it would seem that the material in the pouch needed to remain confidential, McCarrick patted his arm and replied, ‘You’re good. But I think I can count on you’.”
Not long after this exchange, Bottino said, he witnessed McCarrick grope the crotch area of the young priest sitting next to him at the dinner table. The young priest appeared “paralyzed” and “terrified.” McHugh then abruptly stood up “in a sort of panic” and said he and Bottino had to leave, perhaps only 20 minutes after their arrival
There is no evidence that Smith or McHugh reported the incident to any Holy See official, including the apostolic nuncio.
[…]
Summorum Pontificum was abrogated in 2021. This is just clinging to a past that is beyond its expiration date.
I see the Monopoly Man in the last picture took off his hat in church.
The TLM has lost. Trads just don’t realize it yet.
“Has lost”? I didn’t know it was a contest. Thanks a lot for letting me know that it is, from one perspective anyway.
It’s not a contest or competition. We’re a universal Church with room for many Rites and liturgies.
Unity, not uniformity.
Yeah but that was the Rupnik-Pontificate, so it’s to be ignored.
Scott Walker: you come across as an angry & bitter man. Try Christ.
Classic. Argumentum ad hominem followed with the obligatory ipse dixit.
Scott Walker. You have the perspicacity to have spotted the Monopoly Man in this very rare photo. Perhaps a premonition that the gods of good fortune are betting on the restoration of the TLM [why else would the Monopoly Man, an obvious traditionalist, have attended this Mass?].
Yours exhibits perfectly the problem at hand.
Scott;
Re: your 10/25 @9:51 p.m. – Do yourself a favor and go to a TLM. Get there about 30-45 minutes early, sit quietly (notice that the others are doing so) perhaps say a Rosary. Read from your Missal or just sit there and enjoy the silence until the Mass begins.
If you have to get up before dawn and then drive 50 or more miles to get there – tant mieux.
When in God’s universe and God’s eternity and human worship of God and His revelations of immutability has truth ever changed or been timebound?
Agree 100%! Cardinal Burke’s grand Vetus Ordo Mass at St. Peter’s, the usual parade of lace, Latin, and liturgical nostalgia, polished up as if it’s some kind of triumph. You’d think the 1962 Missal had just staged a stunning comeback on the Vatican charts. In reality? It’s more like an old vinyl spinning for a very small crowd who still swear it sounds better than Spotify.
Once again, the Tridentine enthusiasts are treating this as proof that “tradition lives on,” when in fact, it’s mostly wheezing on life support. Even before Traditionis Custodes turned down the volume, there were barely 1,700 parishes worldwide offering the old Mass out of roughly 225,000. That’s not a “movement”; that’s a niche hobby. In the U.S., it was about 700 out of 18,000 — a sliver that wouldn’t fill a pew in St. Peter’s.
Meanwhile, the rest of the Church, the overwhelming majority, has moved on, celebrating Vatican II’s liturgical reforms with the Novus Ordo in living, breathing communities. But sure, let’s pretend this tiny, dwindling enclave of dissenters represents the future. Nothing says “vibrant renewal” quite like shrinking attendance and defiant muttering about 1962.
“the usual parade of lace, Latin, and liturgical nostalgia, polished up as if it’s some kind of triumph.” Oh, the horror! Latin!?
Do the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom next. Don’t hold back. Your charity and insight is sooooo needed.
“It’s more like an old vinyl spinning for a very small crowd who still swear it sounds better than Spotify.”
I’ve used Spotify for years and own 4,000 LPs. Both have advantages and drawbacks. But, in your world, we just toss out the vinyl and mock it.’
I have a hard time believing you are an actual deacon.
Carl, I doubt that he is a deacon. He uses the title to give credibility to what he writes without which there is none. If he were a deacon in actuality, he wouldn’t hesitate to use his full (and actual) name. He’s best ignored.
Deacon Dom, why such uncharity?
Why is liturgical diversity celebrated only selectively?
Catholics worshipping together at a licit Mass is a good thing whether it’s the TLM in the photos or a mariachi Mass in honor of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
For goodness sakes. Our Church is catholic and universal. There’s plenty of room for everyone.
I looked at all 2 minutes and 3 seconds of this video, and I found no dwindling:
March 1st 2023 – The Altar is Installed – Building The Immaculata
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMYtADn_xh8
Death has, of course, “abrogated” the abrogator. But not the TLM. This from one who is not a particular advocate of it. I simply respect those who are.
Snarky attitudes, btw, are invariably more harmful to the articulators of them than they are to their targets. That they (the articulators) don’t know this is part of their problem.
Our patrimony.
Let the Extraordinary Form of the Mass BREATHE freely alongside so many other Rites in the Church each of which have their own form. Lets stop the warring among Catholics. If we don’t, we’re no better than Hamas v. Jews and Ukrainians v. Russians. But if we do, we’re more like Christ.
Right on, Deacon!
Deacon and Br Jaques: agreed. Liturgical peace is the only way forward. But who is making war? It’s been a one-sided liturgical-genocide since 16.07.2021.
“The pilgrimage began on the evening of Oct. 24 with vespers in Rome’s Basilica of San Lorenzo in Lucina, presided over by Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, archbishop of Bologna. A solemn closing Mass of Christ the King will be celebrated at the Church of Santissima Trinità dei Pellegrini on the final day of the pilgrimage, Oct. 26.”
Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage began with vespers in Rome’s Basilica of San Lorenzo in Lucina, presided over by Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, who has defected from The Catholic Faith through his public manifest heresy that denies Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture. And The Teaching Of The True Magisterium of The Catholic Church, Grounded In Sacred Tradition And Sacred Tradition, The Deposit Of Faith Christ Has Entrusted To His Church For The Salvation Of Souls, by his desire to Bless and have Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church begin to Bless, disordered sexual relationships that deny Christ’s teaching regarding lust and the sin of adultery? Who would approve such a denial of The Deposit Of Faith , Christ Has Entrusted To His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, for The Salvation Of Souls and claim such an act is an act of compassion?
The question is, how can both Cardinal Zuppi and Cardinal Burke both be Baptized Catholics who desire to keep their Baptismal Promise to remain in communion with Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, and thus be United in Prayer With The One Word Of God, Jesus The Christ?
“They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.”
https://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal-zuppi-same-sex-blessing
Grace a Dieu
Blessed are the Peacemakers.
Amen, Knowall.
And those who save souls.
Apparently the purpose of depriving Catholic faithful of the TLM is for the Church Establishment to show that they own and control everything in their “Bugnini-ized-NGO-of-the-decapitated-Body.”
As JP2 and B16 observed, they are incapable of “generosity.”
And Insane.
See, when you write things like that, it confirms that trads are recalcitrant and will never agree to be integrated into the post-Vatican II Church. Peter Kwasniewski published a screed on Friday saying that trads will never compromise nor assimilate nor yield. Pope Francis was correct that TLM adherents and communities inculcate insular separation from the rest of the Church.
Donald:
As I believe you are replying to me, I do not have the opportunity (any longer) to attend The Mass I served and sang at as a boy, so I am like millions more aptly labeled a “Bugnini-Mass-hostage.”
I simply observe that the Church Establishment is utterly incapable of being “generous” (as JP2/ B16 specifically directed) to faithful who desire the TLM, and as their just reward they deserve to wear the badge of their malice, as a sign of how miserly they are.
I suppose their miserliness flows from the apostasy that their “thought leaders” profess, and that do many of them silently assent to.
Poor darlings that they are..,
That’s just silly, Donald. I love the TLM but it’s not a deal breaker for me. I know many other Catholics who feel likewise.
Choices are good and so is diversity in a catholic and universal Church. It’s not all one or the other.
Donald: you sound angry. Why call fellow Catholics “trads”? It’s offensive. Does anyone have a gun pressed to your temple forcing you to attend Mass in the Extraordinary Form?
Why should Catholics be forced to make compromises with beliefs that are not catholic or damage the faith?
The church is dying because of all a the compromises that have been.
If the faith that is being taught and practiced today is the same as before the council, then why such hatred and anger towards the pre vatican II liturgy and practices?
The evidence is that there is a small cadre of prelates led by the late Pope for whom the suppression of this liturgy is an imperious exercise of ecclesial power. Now that we know the putative reasons for TC were contrived, it should be annulled.
Francis famous enjoined others to make a mess. Nobody can accuse him of not leading by example.
How many of vernaculars can the Mass be said? No restrictions that I am aware, but the Latin Mass is supposedly divisive. Nearly Verboten. It’s not about God or faith. It’s ungodly power politics baby.
I am not “a trad” but I would refuse to participate in that grand TLM in the Vatican because I do not wish to land myself to manipulation. It would be unthinkable for me to participate in such Mass while the same TLM is being suppressed/restricted to the point of suffocation elsewhere.
Most “trads” seem not to realize that they are being used by the Vatican as a tool for proving credibility to its current course. I have seen “trads” lashing those Catholics who criticize the Pope for his inconsistencies and watering down the faith or turning it into something else. Those “trads” appear not to realize that an occasional TLM given to them is only to buy their allegiance or at least to be quiet.
This is a brilliant technique, actually, “see, even the most traditional Catholics approve me so I am not deviating from the faith”.
However, there is an obvious flavour of insincerity and absurdity in a situation when TLM is pompously celebrated in the Vatican yet it is being suffocated elsewhere – in the common parishes, among common people who need it. If TLM is to be suppressed, it must be suppressed everywhere – but PL needs TLM, not as a people’s Mass but as a part of his entourage, as an artefact in a museum.
I don’t see any manipulation going on. I don’t know that we should even be looking for that. Why not be grateful for this opportunity & move forward?
Anna:
That is a very shrewd observation.
It’s all part of the cult and practice of deceitfulnees.
Anna, Is anyone threatening to put a gun to your head and march you from your home to a church where the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is going to be said? Do you ‘vent your spleen’ when someone mentions Mass in the Anglican Ordinariate Form? Or the Melikte? Or the Ruthenian? Or the Maronite? Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc…?
This Sunday November 2 will be the beginning of Eastern Daylight time, meaning that if I want to go to the Latin Mass in Lewiston, 55 miles away I can, since I won’t have to drive in the dark.
So I’ll be on my feet at 5:30 and around 6 Rachel and I will be on the road and we’ll proceed westerly to Lewiston to the magnificent Sts. Peter & Paul Basilica, built around 1900 or so by the Franco-American Catholics there (the Stations of the Cross are in French). Does all this make me a “trad”? I haven’t the slightest idea.
It’s been a long time since I’ve been there – I can’t wait!!
As a simple matter of ecclesiological liturgical coherence, the TLM should be completely eliminated. Yes, even the Ecclesia Dei religious communities should be told that they may no longer accept new candidates for ordination unless they agree to switch from celebrating the old Mass to the new Mass.
The TLM is no longer an adequate liturgical expression of Catholic faith after Vatican 2. That’s the crux of the matter. It would be liturgically incoherent to maintain both liturgical expressions simultaneously, and to continue with the unrevised Mass.
“The TLM is no longer an adequate liturgical expression of Catholic faith after Vatican 2.”
And The Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom? Should it go as well? After all, the priest has his back to the people much of the time, some parts aren’t in English, the icon screen keeps the people from seeing all that is happening up front, and the reverence is overwhelming. Surely that’s not adequate for 2025, right?
Carl, I have to think that most of these who rail against the EF are simply poorly catechized Catholics. I would also venture a guess that they are not well-travelled either. How could they possibly tolerate attending Mass in Germany, Sweden, Italy, Austria, Czech, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Ukraine, Poland, etc since none of them are likely to celebrate Mass in English and they “won’t understand a word of it?”