A timeline of abuse allegations against deceased former cardinal Theodore McCarrick

 

CNA Newsroom, Apr 4, 2025 / 19:20 pm (CNA).

The following is a timeline of important dates from the McCarrick Report and elsewhere regarding abuse allegations against recently deceased former cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

Published by the Vatican on Nov. 10, 2020, the McCarrick Report examined the “institutional knowledge and decision-making” regarding McCarrick, who was found guilty of sexual abuse of minors and seminarians in 2019 and laicized after an expedited canonical investigation.

July 7, 1930: Theodore Edgar McCarrick is born in New York City, the only child of Theodore E. and Margaret McLaughlin McCarrick.

1954: McCarrick graduates from Fordham University in New York with a bachelor of arts degree in philosophy.

1954-1958: McCarrick attends St. Joseph’s Seminary in New York and attains a master of arts degree in theology.

May 31, 1958: New York Cardinal Francis Spellman ordains McCarrick to the priesthood at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. McCarrick is incardinated into the Archdiocese of New York.

November 1965: Pope Paul VI grants McCarrick the honorary title of monsignor.

June 29, 1977: McCarrick is consecrated as auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of New York by then-archbishop Cardinal Terence Cooke.

November 1981: Pope John Paul II appoints McCarrick as bishop of Metuchen, New Jersey, after receiving glowing reviews of him in the terna evaluating him for the position.

Mid-1980s: A New York Catholic mother, identified as “Mother 1,” sends out an anonymous letter to every cardinal in the United States as well as to the papal nuncio detailing concerns that McCarrick is “attracted to boys.” Mother 1’s family had grown close to McCarrick during his time in New York. Mother 1 grew suspicious after she observed McCarrick rubbing her sons’ inner thighs and chests, and when she was told he bought alcohol for the young men on overnight trips. Fearing backlash for speaking against the prominent cleric, she kept her identity anonymous. No copies of Mother 1’s letter are found for the McCarrick report.

May 24, 1986: Pope John Paul II appoints McCarrick, nearly 56 years old, as archbishop of Newark, New Jersey, after receiving strong recommendations from bishops in the U.S. None mention concerns regarding inappropriate behavior.

1989-1996: Three priests, identified as Priest 1, Priest 3, and Priest 4, report to Bishop Edward Hughes (McCarrick’s successor in Metuchen) instances of sexual assault they suffered by McCarrick while he was in Metuchen. The accusations, reported in separate meetings, include sharing a bed with McCarrick and sexual touching and assault that occurred during overnight stays at a beach house on the Jersey shore while two of the priests were seminarians. One of the incidents, reported by Priest 3, occurred while he was a priest. These priests later said that Hughes listened to them but either sent them on for therapy or urged them to forgive McCarrick. There is no evidence that Hughes told anyone else of these priests’ reports of McCarrick’s misconduct.

January 1990: Monsignor Dominic Bottino of the Diocese of Camden, New Jersey, attends a small celebration with McCarrick. Both Bottino and his bishop, James Thomas McHugh, notice McCarrick groping the crotch of a young priest. McHugh dismisses Bottino’s voiced concerns and says McCarrick was just “different.” Bottino tells his spiritual director at the time of the incident but no one else, since his bishop dismissed the incident.

1992-1993: Six anonymous letters and one pseudonymous letter alleging sexual misconduct by McCarrick are mailed to various Catholic prelates, including U.S. apostolic nuncio Agostino Cacciavillan, Cardinal John O’Connor, and leaders of the U.S. bishops’ conference. The letters accuse McCarrick of pedophilia or incest and sharing beds with young men. Some of McCarrick’s “nephews” with whom he shared beds were his distant relatives.

The accusations against McCarrick at this time are dismissed on the basis of McCarrick’s good reputation and due to the anonymity of the letter and the lack of specific accusations.

1993-1995: Newark is evaluated as a potential site for a papal visit by Pope John Paul II.

During this evaluation, Mother Mary Quentin Sheridan, superior general of the Religious Sisters of Mercy of Alma in Michigan, and a priest call Cacciavillan about reports they had heard of seminarians abused by McCarrick. After consulting Cardinal James Hickey of Washington, D.C., about the allegations, Cacciavillan dismisses them as “possible slander or exaggeration.”

Hickey tells the nuncio he knew McCarrick and his associates very well and had never heard of or seen any inappropriate behavior from McCarrick.

1995: Pope John Paul II visits Newark, and the visit proceeds without any report of scandal.

1996-1997: Priest 1 has been accused of sexual assault of two minors and was on leave. In the course of an evaluation of his fitness for ministry, Priest 1 told psychiatrist Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons and priest-psychologist Monsignor James Cassidy of the sexual assault he witnessed and experienced at the hands of McCarrick. Cassidy reports the matter to O’Connor, who told Hughes. In 2000, in an account to Cacciavillan, Hughes stated that he was not sure whether to believe the report, as Priest 1 has a “history of blaming others for his own problems.”

March 1997: Fitzgibbons travels to Rome to share the information he had received from Priest 1 with an official at the Congregation for Bishops. The congregation unsuccessfully attempts to contact Priest 1. There is no evidence of further action taken.

June-July 1999: Pope John Paul II tells O’Connor that he is considering appointing McCarrick to the Archdiocese of New York.

July 1999: O’Connor advises aposolic nuncio Gabriel Montalvo that McCarrick should not be elevated to New York due to moral issues. Montalvo asks O’Connor to put his concerns in writing.

Oct. 27, 1999: Montalvo sends a report to Cardinal Lucas Moreira Neves, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, regarding the archbishopric of New York. Based on recommendations from U.S. bishops and cardinals, Montalvo recommends McCarrick for the position and notes he would be a “worthy member” of the College of Cardinals. He adds that McCarrick has been accused of “misplaced affection” but that there is no supporting evidence.

Oct. 28, 1999: After a delay for cancer treatment, O’Connor writes Montalvo with his concerns about McCarrick. O’Connor states that it was common knowledge among clergy in the Archdiocese of Newark that McCarrick frequently shared beds with male guests, including priests and seminarians. He also notes that there had been a priest very close to McCarrick who accompanied him on at least one international trip who had since left the priesthood. Furthermore, he recalls that a psychologist and psychiatrist had confirmed the veracity of the claims of at least one priest who said he was victimized by McCarrick.

O’Connor also states that McCarrick had written a letter of defense of a young man convicted of murdering a young woman. He also notes that the general attitude among clergy in Newark and Metuchen is that their concerns about McCarrick had been ignored.

Montalvo forwards the letter to the Congregation for Bishops and to the Secretariat of State. Then-Archbishop Giovanni Battista Re, then substitute of the Secretariat of State, informs Pope John Paul II of the letter. At the request of the pope, Re consults Cacciavillan, who had been nuncio in the U.S. when most of the allegations against McCarrick had occurred.

Cacciavillan casts serious doubt on all six of O’Connors concerns, saying the incidents were just a few rumors. He adds that McCarrick had not been given a chance to defend himself. Still, he recommends that McCarrick go to Washington, D.C., instead of New York, because O’Connor had not recommended McCarrick as his successor.

Nov. 22, 1999: Re, per the request of the pope, writes to Montalvo, asking him to look into the claims against McCarrick at his convenience “for the sake of the truth.”

Feb. 8, 2000: Cardinal Moreira Neves of the Congregation for Bishops tells Montalvo that, based on the accusations against McCarrick, as well as his age (almost 70), he should not be transferred to a different diocese.

May-June 2000: Following the death of O’Connor, Montalvo investigates the claims against McCarrick. He asks Bishop James T. McHugh (Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York, 1998-2000); Bishop Vincent D. Breen (Diocese of Metuchen, New Jersey, 1997-2000); Bishop Edward T. Hughes (Diocese of Metuchen, 1987-1997); and Bishop John M. Smith (Diocese of Trenton, New Jersey, 1997-2010), to send him any factual information or other observations about any moral weaknesses in McCarrick.

May 12, 2000: McHugh responds to Montalvo. He confirms knowledge of McCarrick sharing beds with seminarians, priests, and other men, though he says he had not witnessed “improper behavior” but rather a “familiarity [that] was imprudent.” He confirms McCarrick’s defense of the young man convicted of murder and offers to be of further assistance.

May 16, 2000: Breen responds to Montalvo, saying he heard rumors of “illicit activities with young men” but that he had no way to prove them. He recommends contacting Hughes for more information.

May 18, 2000: Smith responds to Montalvo. He says while he lived with McCarrick, he would be visited by his “nephews” from New York on occasion and that they would sometimes spend the night but never indicated the next morning that they were upset or that anything improper had happened. He says he would be “completely shocked” if an individual were to accuse McCarrick of serious wrongdoing or moral failure.

May 22, 2000: Hughes responds to Montalvo. He says he does not have factual information regarding McCarrick’s moral weaknesses. He notes that two priests who came forward with accusations, Priest 6 and Priest 1, did so in the course of admitting their own moral failures and may have been attempting to justify their actions. He recommends against McCarrick’s promotion but also against disciplinary actions.

June 21, 2000: Montalvo sends his findings to Re, informing him that his investigation found that accusations against McCarrick “are neither definitively proven nor completely groundless.” Based on this, he said, it would be “imprudent” to consider McCarrick for any kind of promotions.

May-July 2000: Montalvo receives more endorsements for McCarrick’s appointment for Washington.

July 2000: Re and Pope John Paul II conclude that it would be unwise to promote McCarrick to Washington, D.C.

Aug. 6, 2000: McCarrick writes to Bishop Stanisław Dziwisz, Pope John Paul II’s secretary, refuting the accusations against him. He says he was “tipped off” by a Curia friend about O’Connor’s letter, which had “deeply attacked” him and left him “bewildered.”

“Your Excellency, sure I have made mistakes and may have sometimes lacked in prudence, but in the 70 years of my life, I have never had sexual relations with any person, male or female, young or old, cleric or lay, nor have I ever abused another person or treated them with disrespect,” McCarrick writes. “… If I understand the accusations that Cardinal O’Connor may have made, they are not true.”

McCarrick adds that he would accept whatever decision the Holy Father makes.

August 2000: Dziwisz delivers McCarrick’s letter to the pope, who gives the letter to Re. Re later says John Paul II had become convinced of McCarrick’s innocence after that letter.

Sept. 16, 2000: Pope John Paul II appoints Re as prefect of the Congregation for Bishops.

Sept. 20, 2000: The secretary for the Congregation for Bishops writes to Cacciavillan and asks that McCarrick be reconsidered for the Washington archbishopric based on his letter to Dziwisz pleading innocence.

Sept. 25, 2000: In a written memorandum, Cacciavillan recommends McCarrick to the Congregation for Bishops for the Washington position. He says McCarrick could defend himself against any accusations that may come to light with the appointment since they were false.

October 2000: McCarrick travels to Rome for a private audience with Dziwisz and Pope John Paul II. There is no record of what occurred in the meeting.

Oct. 11, 2000: Re recommends McCarrick as one of two candidates for the Washington position to Pope John Paul II.

November 2000: Pope John Paul II appoints McCarrick as the archbishop of Washington, D.C.

Nov. 24, 2000: Dominican Father Boniface Ramsey, who taught at the seminary at Seton Hall University from the late 1980s-1996, knew of prevalent rumors of McCarrick sharing beds with seminarians. Alarmed at the news of McCarrick’s promotion, he writes to nuncio Montalvo, stating that he had heard from multiple seminarians about sharing McCarrick’s bed at the Jersey beach house. He adds that while he did not know of any certain sexual relations that had occurred, “at the least the archbishop was seen to be acting with extreme impropriety and to be playing with fire.”

Ramsey declines to name specific seminarians and suggests the nuncio speak with other rectors at the seminary to confirm the rumors. Ramsey tells a friend and Montalvo that he strongly feared backlash for expressing his concerns. He does not recall receiving any response.

Early 2001: Montalvo receives an anonymous note warning of serious scandal if McCarrick is made a cardinal.

January 2001: Montalvo forwards the anonymous note and Ramsey’s letter to Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano, who forwards the letters to Pope John Paul II. The pope gives them back to Sodano, who makes a note: “Nihil dicens,” or “nothing is produced.”

Jan. 3, 2001: McCarrick is installed as archbishop of Washington.

Feb. 21, 2001: McCarrick is elevated to a cardinal by Pope John Paul II.

Early 2000s: McCarrick continues extensive work on numerous national and international committees of the U.S. bishops’ conference, including a prominent role in constructing new policies for addressing child sexual abuse within the Church. He is also appointed to numerous Vatican council positions.

His position in Washington means he regularly meets with federal government officials, including President George W. Bush. Following the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, McCarrick plays a prominent role in addressing the crisis with national figures.

McCarrick, despite refusing a salary as an archbishop, continues large donations and financial gifts to the Holy Father, other prelates, religious orders, and disaster relief funds. His extensive international travels continue. He is also tasked by the U.S. government in 2001 with developing diplomatic relations between China and the Vatican, a project he enthusiastically undertakes and that was supported by the nuncio.

Nov. 15, 2001: Cardinal James Hickey, then archbishop emeritus of Washington, receives a letter from a Catholic layman and former student about “wrongdoing” by a bishop, but he does not mention McCarrick specifically. The man requests a meeting to discuss the matter more. Montalvo assigns Bishop William Lori to meet with the man. In a written report, Lori says the man could not recall any specific details of wrongdoing by McCarrick and ultimately dismisses the allegation as “hearsay.”

January 2002: The Boston Globe publishes a series of stories about child sexual abuse by U.S. priests, and a major scandal erupts in the Church in the U.S.

March 2002: Montalvo receives another letter from a layman who had spiritually directed a transitional deacon at Seton Hall who claimed that McCarrick had been “sexually inappropriate” with him at the Jersey beach house. Montalvo contacts Newark Archbishop John Myers, who later responds that he did not recognize the deacon’s name. He adds that he had received other anonymous accusations against McCarrick but that they were untraceable rumors and not concrete incidents. No further action or investigation is undertaken.

April 2002: McCarrick admits to Susan Gibbs, communications director for the Archdiocese of Washington, that he had shared beds with seminarians as she questioned him about rumors. He tells Gibbs that he only ever traveled with groups of seminarians and not alone, and that they were always clothed when they shared a bed. He said he shared beds with them because he thought it was inappropriate to ask seminarians to share beds with each other.

Gibbs questions McCarrick multiple times about the rumors and contacts former diocesan personnel of his, but none of them report any specific instances of improper behavior. She also talks to reporters from the Washington Post and the New York Times, who also cannot get anyone to go on the record or on background with any specific allegations.

McCarrick is questioned for two separate media interviews about the sex abuse crisis, including the allegations against him. He tells reporters that the accusation was anonymous, that he had brought it forward, and that he had never had sexual relations with anyone in his life.

Nov. 15, 2004: Bishop Donald Wuerl of the Diocese of Pittsburgh sends Montalvo a signed statement from Priest 2, the former seminarian and priest of the Diocese of Metuchen. In it, the priest recalls “problematic” and “extremely inappropriate” behavior including backrubs and bed sharing with McCarrick. He does not overtly accuse him of sexual abuse in the statement. There is no record that Montalvo forwarded the letter to the Vatican.

Feb. 24, 2005: Myers writes to nuncio Montalvo warning him that McCarrick’s behavior, according to Priest 2’s lawyer, may constitute abuse. There is no record that Montalvo contacts the Vatican about this.

April 2005: McCarrick travels to Rome after the death of Pope John Paul II and participates in the conclave that elects Pope Benedict XVI.

June 2005: A settlement is reached with Priest 2 and the Diocese of Metuchen for $80,000. No lawsuit is filed, and McCarrick is not named specifically in the settlement, which also covers accusations of abuse from a high school teacher in the diocese. McCarrick sends $10,000 to the diocese around this time, apparently as part of the settlement. There is no indication that the nuncio or the Vatican know of this settlement.

Late June 2005: In a dispute about Priest 1’s fitness for ministry, summaries of the instances of abuse from McCarrick suffered by Priest 1 are sent to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

June 22, 2005: The night before his 75th birthday, McCarrick submits his resignation as archbishop of Washington to Pope Benedict XVI, as is customary per canon law.

Summer 2005: Cardinal Re, after consulting Pope Benedict XVI, extends McCarrick’s position in Washington two more years.

September 2005: A canonist working with the CDF writes in an internal memorandum that Priest 1 had indicated that he did not want to cause public scandal in the Church with his allegations against McCarrick. Priest 1’s petition to return to active ministry is denied and the case considered closed by the Vatican.

Nov. 5, 2005: Pope Benedict XVI reverses the decision to extend McCarrick’s term in Washington, based on credible accusations against him, likely obtained by Archbishop William Levada, the new prefect for the Congregation for Bishops. Re informs the Congregation for Bishops of the request.

Nov. 7, 2005: Re sends nuncio Montalvo a copy of McCarrick’s Aug. 6, 2000, letter pleading innocence to Bishop Dziwisz. Re adds a note stating that new information had surfaced, making the accusations seem credible, and that he is going to ask McCarrick to withdraw from Washington. Re also writes to McCarrick asking him to come to Rome before the end of the month to discuss the decision.

Dec. 5, 2005: Re meets with McCarrick in Rome. McCarrick admits to sharing beds with seminarians but says that nothing sexual ever happened, including no “incomplete” acts. He accepts moving his resignation up to Easter 2006 but asks that it be done in a way that would not be seen as a “punishment.”

Shortly thereafter, Bishop Paul Bootkoski of the Diocese of Metuchen forwards to nuncio Montalvo specific allegations previously made by Priest 1 and Priest 2. Priest 2 recalled specific instances of sharing a small bed with McCarrick during which there was “inappropriate … although not clearly sexual” physical contact.

Priest 1 said he had witnessed “sexual touching” of McCarrick with his sleeping partner on one trip and that he was told he “would be next.” On a subsequent trip, McCarrick shared a bed with Priest 1 and touched him in a sexual way. The reports are forwarded to Re.

Dec. 17, 2005: Montalvo announces his retirement from the U.S. nunciature, and Archbishop Pietro Sambi is named as his successor.

Dec. 28, 2005: Re writes to Montalvo, still in office, to inform him of his meeting with McCarrick and to ask him to start the process of finding McCarrick’s successor in Washington, D.C.

Jan. 17, 2006: McCarrick meets again with Re in Rome. This time, McCarrick brings a three-page handwritten refutation of the allegations against him. He emphasizes that he never had sexual relationships with anyone in his life and vigorously denies that he had ever had any inappropriate contact with anyone, swearing to it on his “oath as a bishop.” He then says he would accept the judgment of the Holy Father.

March 2006: McCarrick asks Monsignor Robert Sheeran, president of Seton Hall University, about residing part time in an on-campus residence for priests, close to the seminary. Archbishop Myers tells Sheeran he strongly opposes the move. McCarrick arranges to live part time at the Redemptoris Mater seminary in Hyattsville, Maryland.

May 16, 2006: Pope Benedict XVI accepts McCarrick’s resignation as archbishop of Washington. Bishop Donald W. Wuerl is selected as his successor. As archbishop emeritus, McCarrick receives housing, a stipend, health benefits, an office, a secretary, and transportation. He declines to draw a pension.

June 2006: An attorney representing Priest 1 meets with officials from the Diocese of Metuchen, and an incident report is filed with the diocese. Priest 1 has since moved to a different state and has been removed from the clerical state due to accusations that he had sexually assaulted two minors. The report notes that Priest 1’s allegations against McCarrick had also been filed with multiple district attorneys’ offices as well as dioceses in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Pennsylvania.

In the report, Priest 1 recalls that he witnessed McCarrick having sex with another priest and that on multiple, specific occasions, he felt forced to share a bed with McCarrick, who would touch him in a sexual manner.

August 2006: Priest 1’s attorney and representatives of the dioceses of Newark and of Metuchen agree to a mediation conference with a former civil judge on Nov. 15, 2006.

Oct. 3, 2006: Archbishop Myers faxes the incident report to the U.S. nunciature. In a memorandum, a nunciature official notes the unequal relationship of McCarrick to Priest 1, as the incidents took place when Priest 1 was a seminarian — “thus a ‘superior-subordinate’ relationship.” The nunciature faxes the report to the Congregation for Bishops.

Oct. 17, 2006: Re, prefect of the congregation, responds to U.S. nuncio Sambi and, fearing media scandal, advises that McCarrick move out of his seminary residence and live a life of quiet prayer “so as to not cause himself to be spoken of.” Re adds that he discussed McCarrick’s situation with Wuerl in Rome but that the nuncio should be the one to ask McCarrick to move and live a quiet life of prayer.

November 2006: Priest 1’s testimony about incidents regarding McCarrick were video recorded. No records indicate that the recording was sent to the Vatican. The parties agree to a settlement for Priest 1’s claims.

Sambi advises Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone against involving McCarrick in further foreign and domestic affairs of the Church due to allegations of abuse against McCarrick.

Dec. 6, 2006: Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, at the time the delegate for pontifical representations within the Secretariat of State, writes a memorandum related to the November 2006 communication from Sambi to Bertone.

In it, he notes that Priest 1’s accusations “amount to the crimes of entrapment, solicitation of seminarians and priests to commit wicked acts, repeatedly and simultaneously with more than one person, making a mockery of the young seminarian who tried to resist the archbishop’s seduction in the presence of two other priests, absolution of the accomplice to these wicked acts, and sacrilegious concelebration of the Eucharist with the same priests after committing such acts.”

Viganò’s memorandum is read by Archbishop Leonardo Sandri and Secretary of State Bertone, who phones Re to speak about the matter. The memorandum is then archived.

December 2007: Sambi meets with McCarrick to discuss his move out of the Redemptoris Mater seminary and the request that he live a quiet life of prayer. An emotional McCarrick tells Sambi that because Priest 1 was 25 at the time of the allegations, what had happened was not a crime, and that his continued pursuit of the allegations seemed to be a grab for money.

January 2007: Sambi reports his meeting with McCarrick to Re and adds that he looked into whether the leaders of Redemptoris Mater seminary considered McCarrick an active threat. Seminary leaders say McCarrick was “touchy” but they did not consider him to be a threat.

Jan. 15, 2007: Bertone and Pope Benedict XVI discuss problems relating to McCarrick in a private and unrecorded audience. Bertone later recalls that Benedict XVI wanted McCarrick’s activities “contained” but did not think it necessary to pursue a CDF investigation.

May 2007: Legal counsel for McCarrick tries to get Priest 1, as part of the settlement, to sign a statement saying that McCarrick never had sexual relations with Priest 1 nor did Priest 1 observe McCarrick having sexual relations with anyone. Priest 1 refuses to sign.

August 2007: Priest 1 reaches a $100,000 agreement with the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen. The settlement does not name McCarrick or include an admission of wrongdoing. There is no record that the Vatican was informed that a settlement was reached.

2007-2008: McCarrick remains active in work for multiple U.S. bishops’ conference committees as well as work with other Catholic nonprofits and maintains an extensive international travel schedule for this work. He attends several international events where Benedict XVI is present and engages in occasional diplomatic work for the Vatican.

McCarrick keeps Sambi regularly informed of his extensive travels. McCarrick writes to Sambi about having spoken with Pope Benedict XVI during a 2008 general audience: “I did see the Holy Father during the public audience and his greeting to me was, ‘You are still traveling a lot.’” McCarrick admits he did not know if this was a warning or a friendly greeting.

Sambi seeks McCarrick’s input on numerous matters including politics, international affairs, and U.S. bishop appointments. He regularly encourages McCarrick’s activities and thanks him for his work. It appears Cardinal Re is unaware of McCarrick’s travels at this time.

McCarrick maintains residence at Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Hyattsville, Maryland, during this time, where he lives in his own wing.

April 2008: Pope Benedict XVI travels to the U.S. McCarrick concelebrates Mass with Pope Benedict XVI at St. Patrick’s Cathedral and attends dinner with the pope in New York.

Spring 2008: Shortly after the pope’s trip, psychotherapist and former Benedictine monk Richard Sipe publishes an online “open letter“ to Pope Benedict XVI titled “Statement for Pope Benedict XVI about the Pattern of the Sexual Abuse Crisis in the United States.“

Sipe claims that abuse in the Church is “systemic” and uses McCarrick as an example. He says he had heard from several seminarians about the sleepovers at the beach house and that he had written testimony from priests about sexual advances made toward them by McCarrick.

May 2008: Re writes to Sambi regarding the open letter, telling him to follow McCarrick closely and to let Re know if he needs to repeat his warnings to McCarrick about his residence and travels. He suggests working with Wuerl to find McCarrick an alternative residence to the seminary.

Archbishop Viganò writes a second internal memorandum related to McCarrick to the Congregation for Bishops, noting the accusations in the open letter. He includes an urgent appeal to Benedict XVI to discipline McCarrick. He says dealing with the McCarrick case before legal authorities and before a scandal erupts could be healthy for the Church, and he recommends a CDF investigation. No action is taken.

Mid-May 2008: McCarrick travels to Rome and appears at a public event with Pope Benedict XVI. Re is displeased to see McCarrick in Rome and confronts him about disobeying instructions to live a more private life. McCarrick “does not take it well.”

May 27, 2008: Sambi reports to the Congregation for Bishops that he and Wuerl recommended that McCarrick cease public appearances in the U.S. but that he should be allowed to keep his international travels, as they believe it would cause McCarrick “psychological collapse” to live a life of full retirement.

June 2008: Re responds to Sambi and McCarrick separately. Re tells them both that McCarrick is not to travel publicly in the U.S. or abroad, barring rare exceptions made by the Holy See. McCarrick is also to seek residence in a home run by religious sisters or a monastery, Re suggests. Re later recalls he had communicated the substance of the letters to Pope Benedict XVI, who responds: “Good, very good.”

August 2008: McCarrick writes to Sambi about the restrictions against him. He says he was “bewildered” by Re’s letter because he thought he had been following Vatican instructions by not actively seeking invitations to travel but rather by accepting them from bishops.

He says he was concerned that sudden cancellations of events, or a sudden move to a monastery, would raise red flags in the media. He asks to be moved to a parish, Seton Hall University or other universities, or Rome for his retirement rather than a home for the elderly or a monastery. He promises to cease public engagements.

McCarrick keeps numerous domestic and international public commitments made prior to this letter, which had been left to his judgment.

September 2008: McCarrick appeals to Re and Bertone for leniency regarding his residence and travels.

Sept. 8, 2008: Re responds to nuncio Sambi, saying McCarrick must consult with Wuerl about moving to a parish and must decline public engagements both in the U.S. and abroad, unless he has explicit permission from the Vatican to do otherwise.

Sept. 17, 2008: Bertone meets with McCarrick in Rome and reiterates restrictions from Re regarding his residence and public engagements.

Oct. 1, 2008: McCarrick writes to Sambi to clarify the sanctions against him and asks permission to attend some interreligious meetings with the Catholic delegation to the Vatican. He adds that he will appeal to the Holy Father for permission to visit Rome.

Oct. 3, 2008: Sambi responds to McCarrick and reiterates the sanctions against him, including that he should not travel for groups and agencies of which he is a member.

Oct. 7, 2008: McCarrick writes his letter to Re with blind copy to Bertone. He asks for leniency on the travel sanctions, particularly to be allowed to go to Rome to pray and attend public audiences of the pope. He also asks to be allowed to travel to help with Catholic Relief Services projects in developing countries.

Oct. 21, 2008: Re responds to McCarrick. He says McCarrick would be allowed to visit Rome for private pilgrimages and to visit friends. He tells McCarrick to decline future invitations to engage in meetings for Muslim-Christian dialogue and Catholic Relief Services work, unless given explicit permission from the Congregation for Bishops.

Early November 2008: McCarrick meets with Re on Re’s invitation. There is no record of the meeting.

Nov. 4, 2008: McCarrick emails CRS president Kenneth Hackett and Archbishop Timothy Dolan (then chairman of CRS’ board of directors), with a blind copy to Sambi. McCarrick reports that he had permission to continue work with CRS “as long as I can do it without too much publicity.”

Dec. 21 2008: Following the election of U.S. President Barack Obama, McCarrick writes to Sambi and Bertone, saying he had made important contacts in the new administration and asks if he should keep those contacts as a liason for the Holy See with the new administration.

Dec. 27, 2008: Sambi relays McCarrick’s message to Re and says it would be dangerous to allow McCarrick to have permission to act as a liaison to the White House. Sambi says he told McCarrick that he should instead suggest the president of the USCCB or the archbishop of Washington in his place.

Jan. 5, 2009: McCarrick sends a confidential letter to Cardinal Francis George of Chicago. He tells him of the Vatican sanctions against him “in case you do want to pursue this.” He also tells him of the political connections he has “so that you too can guide me in any efforts that I should make in the political arena in whatever years ahead the Lord desires to give me.”

Jan. 7, 2009: McCarrick writes Sambi to report on a meeting he had with an Obama foreign policy adviser.

Jan. 15, 2009: McCarrick writes a letter to Sambi, which encloses a letter to Re. McCarrick tells Sambi that he is “doing his best” to keep to the sanctions from Re and asks Sambi to look over his letter to Re. He also informs Sambi that he will be traveling to Israel for a Council of Religious Institutions meeting.

Jan. 19, 2009: After speaking with Sambi, McCarrick writes to Re, asking if he may participate in APSA meetings since he considers them low-profile. He adds that it has been “very difficult” to turn down invitations to attend public event invitations from the White House. He adds: “It is so interesting that my reputation among so many of my brother bishops and among the leaders of government, who have access to investigative agencies, still remains so high that they want me present at their functions while the Church seems unwilling to have any confidence in me.”

He adds that he was “trapped” into accepting an invite to say the prayer at the opening of Congress for the House of Representatives. He also notes that he will be traveling to Israel for a project with the State Department as well as to Kosovo, Serbia, and Georgia for CRS projects.

Feb. 23, 2009: Archbishop Domenique Mamberti, the secretary for Relations with States, writes to Sambi regarding McCarrick’s activities with the White House. Mamberti writes that McCarrick should hand over all civil invitations to Cardinal Wuerl or to the president of the USCCB. Mamberti forwards a copy of the letter to Re.

Early 2009: McCarrick moves to St. Thomas the Apostle Parish in Washington, D.C., as arranged by Wuerl. According to the report, McCarrick still maintains an office at the Redemptoris Mater Seminary “and travels there frequently for work.”

McCarrick’s Holy See diplomatic passport is renewed and is sent to him through Sambi. The passport comes with a note that said it would be particularly useful for trips to the Middle East.

May 15, 2009: McCarrick writes to Re asking permission to attend APSA meetings in Rome and the pallium ceremony for Dolan’s induction to the Archdiocese of New York.

May 30, 2009: Re responds to McCarrick, approving his attendance at APSA meetings since they are private. He adds that McCarrick must not attend the pallium ceremony for Dolan due to the media attention the event will receive.

Mid-2009: There is no further record of correspondence between McCarrick and Re or any other member of the Congregation for Bishops. No investigation is launched into the investigations against McCarrick.

Heretofore, the “indications” or sanctions imposed upon McCarrick are not explicit directives of the Holy Father and thus not considered “orders” under canon law. McCarrick is still allowed to continue active ministry, including publicly celebrating Mass and the activities previously mentioned.

July 16, 2009: Archbishop Viganò leaves his position in the Secretariat of State and is appointed secretary-general of the Governorate of Vatican City, “where he would not have been involved in matters pertaining to McCarrick,” according to the report.

Fall 2008 to fall 2011: McCarrick maintains membership in a number of USCCB committees and attends its semiannual meetings. He also remains on the board and foundation for CRS and makes a number of trips for this work. He maintains an extensive international travel schedule during this period. He communicates his travel plans to the Vatican only “on rare occasions” during this time. He also continues to participate in public liturgies and consistories in Rome. There is no record he was reprimanded for this.

He continues to celebrate public Masses in the Archdiocese of Washington, give public statements, and testify before Congress.

According to the report, he keeps Sambi informed on most of his travels and activities and thanks him for his support. Sambi corresponds with him regularly, particularly about foreign affairs, and thanks McCarrick for his work.

May 2010: An official with the Archdiocese of Washington contacts Monsignor Peter B. Wells, the assessor for general affairs of the Secretariat of State, seeking a letter from the pope or Bertone offering blessings on the occasion of McCarrick’s 80th birthday. Wells had heard “rumors” of McCarrick’s misconduct with seminarians but is not aware of the restrictions placed on McCarrick’s movements.

June 2, 2010: In an internal memorandum of the Secretariat of State, George and Wuerl say a birthday message from the Holy Father “seemed inopportune” because it could prompt a “nasty” article from the New York Times about McCarrick’s moral life. Wells decides that a birthday message will not be sent.

June 2010: A Mass is celebrated for McCarrick’s 80th birthday and attended by prominent political officials and Catholic prelates.

Late 2010-early 2011: McCarrick moves from St. Thomas the Apostle Parish Church to a small house near the Church of the St. John Baptist de la Salle Parish in Hyattsville (Chillum), Maryland, which is under the care of the IVE religious order.

Jan. 12, 2011: McCarrick is appointed by the Library of Congress as the distinguished senior scholar in the library’s John W. Kluge Center to study the role of religion in diplomacy and peace negotiations. He accepts the appointment after consulting Sambi.

July 27, 2011: Sambi dies suddenly. Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume is the person responsible for the nunciature until Sambi’s successor is appointed.

McCarrick communicated to Sambi and then communicates to Lantheaume his interest in continuing to help build relationships with China and offers his assistance as needed in this area.

August 2011: Priest 3 files a civil complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the Diocese of Metuchen, the Archdiocese of Newark, and Bishop Bootkoski. It does not name McCarrick but describes three incidents involving him in explicit detail. The complaint is not forwarded to the nunciature.

September 2011: McCarrick travels to Iran to meet with the country’s president and other officials about two American hikers being held in the country. The hikers are soon after released, and the trip is highly publicized.

Oct. 19, 2011: Viganò is appointed by Pope Benedict XVI as Sambi’s successor as U.S. nuncio. According to the report, Viganò receives no written instructions regarding McCarrick, though Cardinal Marc Ouellet, who was appointed prefect in 2010, recalled telling Viganò that McCarrick’s movements were restricted due to past conduct.

In his 2018 testimony, Viganò said he repeated sanctions to McCarrick in a meeting with him. According to the report, there is no record of this meeting, and McCarrick denied that it took place.

During Viganò’s nunciature, McCarrick keeps up his normal activities with the USCCB committees of which he was a member as well as his activities with CRS. He also continues extensive international travels and makes numerous public appearances.

McCarrick regularly communicates his activities and travels to Viganò, and according to the report, there is no record that Viganò recommended McCarrick stop them.

March 2012: Priest 3’s counsel files a certification in the New Jersey case “signed by Priest 3 under penalty of law, which detailed the three incidents involving McCarrick.” There are no records of the nunciature being informed of the certification.

June 2012: McCarrick writes to Viganò, letting him know of multiple upcoming international trips and meetings. McCarrick says that though he enjoyed “the give-and-take of these meetings, I am most willing to go into a more retirement mode if Your Excellency or my other superiors feel that this would be preferred.”

There is no record that Viganò asked McCarrick to enter into a more low-profile retirement mode.

June 29, 2012: A parishioner from Maryland writes to the Archdiocese of Washington expressing concerns about McCarrick, calling him a “predator.” She expresses concerns about his residence at the seminary, his assignment of priest “secretaries,” and his freedom to “roam the world seeking the destruction of souls.” There are no specific accusations made.

Viganò notes the “serious” accusations, but the record does not indicate that he followed up with anyone about the letter.

July 24, 2012: McCarrick and his priest secretary attend a dinner at the nunciature with Viganò. McCarrick sends a thank-you note the next day.

Aug. 6, 2012: Priest 3 writes a letter to Viganò. He says he was sexually assaulted by McCarrick during his time in Metuchen, which he believed was the cause of his “recent problems with the Diocese of Metuchen.” He says he felt he had been wrongfully accused of financial mismanagement and transferred from the Portuguese and Brazilian communities he had been serving.

“Cardinal McCarrick was a sexual predator. As one of his victims, I saw firsthand what it was to be a priest in America,” he writes.

He adds that his civil case is pending, but that regardless, he plans to go public with his accusations against McCarrick, as well as accusations of misconduct against Bishop Bootkoski, and to take his case to the CDF.

Aug. 13, 2012: Viganò writes to Congregation for Bishops prefect Ouellet, attaching Priest 3’s letter and a copy of Re’s June 2008 letter directed to McCarrick. He notes that this was the first he was hearing of accusations against Bootkoski.

Viganò notes that McCarrick had not followed Re’s instructions to live a private life and traveled extensively and continued to accept public invitations. He also adds that he only recently changed residences and that his new residence still gave him access to young religious of the IVE.

“Accordingly, one can affirm that Cardinal Re’s admonition to him is a dead letter,” Vigano writes. He says he awaited instructions on how to act and feared a public scandal regarding McCarrick was imminent.

Copies of the letter are sent to Archbishop Giovanni Angelo Becciu, the substitute in the First Section of the Secretariat of State, and to Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, the new prefect of the CDF.

Sept. 8, 2012: Viganò writes Ouellet after seeing an advertisement that McCarrick has been invited to be a featured speaker at a vocations retreat in the Archdiocese of Washington. He asks Ouellet to issue new restrictions against McCarrick. Viganò then informs Wuerl, who says he was unaware of the event and would cancel it.

Sept. 12, 2012: Ouellet responds to Viganò with instructions for McCarrick. He tells him to 1) Clarify Priest 3’s accusations; and 2) Reiterate to McCarrick that he should live a reserved life of prayer and only travel or accept invitations with the explicit permission of the Holy See. He tells Viganò to evaluate McCarrick’s current residence to see whether it presented a problem.

According to the report, there is no record that Viganò ever contacted Priest 3, who later recalled that he was disappointed to not hear a response from Viganò. Viganò instead “telephoned Bishop Bootkoski, who informed Viganò that Priest 3 was neither credible nor reliable.”

There is no record of Viganò informing leadership of the USCCB or CRS about the renewed restrictions against McCarrick or of an investigation into McCarrick’s new residence.

Mid-November 2012: At the fall general assembly of the USCCB, McCarrick meets with Viganò to complain that he went through Wuerl to cancel the vocations dinner. McCarrick recalled in later interviews that he told Viganò to talk with him directly if he had a problem. McCarrick said Viganò stayed silent during the meeting and “never said anything more to me. He never said I was doing anything wrong. He never did say anything to me about my ‘conduct.’”

McCarrick reported this meeting to Wuerl. There is no record of this meeting elsewhere, in correspondence to the Vatican or in nunciature files.

Feb. 10, 2013: Pope Benedict XVI announces his intent to resign. While McCarrick is too old to vote in the next conclave, he attends meetings in Rome with the cardinals and remains in Rome for the duration of the conclave.

March 13, 2013: Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio is elected pope and takes the name Francis.

Pope Francis met with McCarrick prior to his papacy during McCarrick’s trips to Argentina in 2004 and 2011. According to the report, Francis knew McCarrick was an “indefatigable traveler” engaged in Church work throughout the world despite being retired.

Prior to becoming pope, Francis would not have known of the accusations or restrictions against McCarrick, nor were they discussed in meetings with Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

Early May 2013: McCarrick ordains an IVE seminarian in California without the proper authorization required by the Code of Canon Law. Wuerl, recognizing the error, writes to Viganò to grant McCarrick the authorization, as he was also scheduled to ordain priests at the end of May for the Archdiocese of Washington.

Vigano submits the request to Rome and informs Wuerl once permission was granted. There is no discussion about whether it would be appropriate for McCarrick to perform ordinations.

McCarrick writes to Vigano and Pope Francis to thank them for the prompt granting of permission to ordain priests.

May 20, 2013: Bishop Bootkoski writes to Viganò, informing him that a confidential settlement had been reached with Priest 3, the Diocese of Metuchen, and Bootkoski, without “any admission of liability.”

Bootkoski encloses a letter sent to Priest 3 after the settlement was reached. Priest 3 had been placing flyers on windshields in the dioceses, accusing Bootkoski of engaging in homosexual relations and accusing McCarrick of being a sexual predator. Bootkoski outlines “remedial measures” for Priest 3, including supervision, therapy, and spiritual direction.

June 13, 2013: Viganò writes to Ouellet, forwarding Bootkoski’s letters. According to the report, this “constituted Viganò’s sole response to Ouellet’s letter of Sept. 12, 2012.” There is no other correspondence with Vatican officials about the accusations or restrictions against McCarrick or Priest 3’s case.

The report noted that Pope Francis was still not consulted in matters regarding McCarrick. It added that Becciu, who was serving as Substitute in the Secretariat of State since mid-2011, later recalled that he had mentioned restrictions in McCarrick to Pope Francis sometime in 2013 and once again in the next few years.

Pope Francis later recalled that he had never heard specific accusations and that he assumed that had been found to be without grounds, because of John Paul II’s elevation of McCarrick. John Paul II was so “morally strict, of such moral rectitude, that he would never have permitted a rotten candidacy to move forward,” Francis said.

June 20, 2013: Pope Francis receives McCarrick in a brief private audience at the Domus Santa Marta.

June 21, 2013: Pope Francis individually greets over 100 nuncios gathered for a meeting in Rome, including Viganò.

June 23, 2013, and Oct. 10, 2013: Pope Francis meets with Viganò at Santa Marta. Viganò later said that during these meetings, he told Francis that there was a thick file of accusations against McCarrick at the Congregation for Bishops, that he had committed “crimes” and was a “serial predator.”

Pope Francis said in a later interview that he did not recall Viganò speaking of McCarrick with any “force or clarity.” He said he likely would remember being told of any crimes or abuse committed by McCarrick since he was familiar to him.

There are no written records of these meetings, nor any other written records of Vigano communicating with the Secretariat of State, the Congregation for Bishops, or Ouellet about McCarrick.

McCarrick’s activities 2013-2017: McCarrick keeps up his activities with CRS, the USCCB, as well as numerous public events, Masses, ordinations, and the consecration of bishops, as well as an extensive international travel schedule. He also continues his customary gift-giving to Vatican officials at Christmas.

Until 2016, McCarrick lived in the second story of a house at the IVE seminary in Maryland. In early 2017, he moved to a retirement home run by the Little Sisters of the Poor, at the request of Wuerl and due to declining health.

Between these years, he also wrote 17 known letters to Pope Francis, often discussing his overseas travels. He also made recommendations for bishop appointments in the U.S. He was occasionally thanked for these letters by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Becciu, and a few times by the pope.

In the course of his travels, McCarrick met with Pope Francis privately on June 2013, February 2016, and February 2017. He also occasionally saw him while staying at the Santa Marta in Rome.

McCarrick regularly communicated with Vigano as well, including about his travels and participation in ordinations and other public events.

2013-2014: McCarrick increases his trips to China in order to improve Vatican-China relations. According to the report, these trips were funded by private lay U.S. Catholic donors. Pope Francis’ adviser on China at the time was Parolin.

April 2014: McCarrick is sent by the U.S. State Department with other religious leaders to the Central African Republic on a conflict resolution mission. The trip receives some media publicity in the U.S.

May 5, 2014: Viganò, concerned with McCarrick’s movements, writes to Parolin. He asks whether there are new instructions regarding McCarrick, given that he is continuing to make public appearances despite the Congregation for Bishops’ restrictions.

July 14, 2014: After a brief conversation with Parolin, Ouellet writes a letter to the Secretary of State about the restrictions given against McCarrick, including that he move out of Redemptoris Mater seminary and that he live a private life of prayer and not accept invitations in the U.S. or abroad.

Parolin makes a note to speak with McCarrick about what he had learned from Viganò and Ouellet. The report added that Parolin “adhered to the diplomatic precept that it is best to promote dialogue and ‘never close a door’” and thus allowed McCarrick’s China project to continue. Parolin did not take any further action.

March 16, 2015: Becciu responds to Viganò’s May 2014 letter regarding McCarrick’s travels. He says the information had been “carefully noted.”

February 2016: McCarrick travels to Beijing and discusses environmental policy and the encyclical Laudato Si’ with an nongovernmental organization leader. After the trip, he meets with Parolin in Rome to discuss what he had learned.

March 8, 2016: McCarrick writes to Pope Francis thanking him for allowing him to continue his work and travels but offers to go into retirement at any time. He also writes to Parolin, informing him of upcoming meetings with Muslim leaders but also offering to go into retirement.

Parolin later recalled briefly mentioning “gossip” about McCarrick’s “past imprudent acts” to Pope Francis around this time, but he said he did not present it as grave matter. He said Francis responded that perhaps McCarrick could still be useful.

April 12, 2016: Viganò’s resignation is accepted by Pope Francis. Archbishop Christophe Pierre is appointed the new U.S. nuncio. Toward the end of his term, Viganò thanks McCarrick in a letter “for your commendable ministry to the Church universal and your reaching out most recently to China and the Muslim world, efforts that will no doubt bear much fruit.”

June to November 2016: McCarrick attends several meetings with Chinese officials in Rome. According to the report, these “secondary contacts initiated by Cardinal McCarrick appear to have played no role in leading to the eventual formal agreement between China and the Holy See related to bishops in September 2018.”

June 8, 2017: The Archdiocese of New York receives a claim through its Independent Reconciliation and Compensation Program alleging that McCarrick “unlawfully touched” Minor 1 in the early 1970s, when Minor 1 was 16 or 17. This was the first allegation against McCarrick involving a named minor. The allegation is reported to local law enforcement.

Sept. 7, 2017: Cardinal Dolan writes to Parolin for instructions on how to proceed with the allegation.

Oct. 18, 2017: Pope Francis, via the cardinal secretary of state, tells Dolan to conduct the preliminary investigation called for in canon law and to have the review board of the archdiocese examine the allegation according to its own norms and that of the USCCB.

Oct. 28, 2017: Parolin, at the request of Pope Francis, tells Dolan to submit the findings of these initial investigations to the CDF.

December 2017 to April 2018: The preliminary investigation is conducted with the assistance of lay investigators. The review board conducts interviews with the claimant and McCarrick and unanimously finds the allegations to be credible.

April 23, 2018: Dolan communicates the board’s findings to Parolin.

May 8, 2018: Dolan recommends to Parolin that, given the gravity of allegations against McCarrick, he be permanently removed from public ministry to a life of prayer and penance, and that the case be made public, as it involved sexual abuse of a minor.

May 2018: Becciu informs Pope Francis that the allegation against McCarrick involving Minor 1 was found to be credible. He later recalled that the pope was “shocked” by the news.

May 22, 2018: Parolin writes to nuncio Pierre, asking him to send a letter to McCarrick. The letter tells McCarrick “in the name of the Holy Father” to strictly refrain from public ministry and appearances “until a final decision is made” regarding the allegation.

June 20, 2018: The decision to pull McCarrick from public ministry is made public. Following this, more individuals and information come forward about McCarrick’s misconduct, including a second minor. The Holy See starts a search to identify even more possible victims.

July 28, 2018: Pope Francis accepts McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals.

Dec. 14, 2018: Pope Francis authorizes the CDF to conduct an administrative penal proceeding regarding the McCarrick case. With CDF support, Father Richard Welsh, the judicial vicar of the Archdiocese of New York, gathers evidence and testimonies from witnesses.

Jan. 3, 2019: McCarrick is heard and his legal counsel submits a defense. The information from the proceedings is sent to the CDF and to the civil authorities.

Jan. 11, 2019: Based on the findings of the proceeding, the congress of the CDF issues a decree that states that McCarrick was found guilty of solicitation during the sacrament of confession as well as “sins against the Sixth Commandment with minors and adults, with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power.”

The prescribed penalty is dismissal from the clerical state. McCarrick attempts an appeal of the decision.

Feb. 13, 2019: After considering McCarrick’s appeal, the CDF confirms the original verdict and penalty, which is soon after confirmed final by Pope Francis.

2018-2019: The USCCB and the dioceses of New York, Newark, and Metuchen, as well as Seton Hall University, all launch their own investigations into files related to McCarrick or cooperate with Vatican and civil investigations.

Besides knowledge of bed sharing and inappropriate conduct with seminarians, as well as the reports made to the Diocese of Metuchen by the priests, these investigations do not uncover prior knowledge of sexual abuse of minors by McCarrick by anyone at these entities.

July 28, 2021: McCarrick is charged with sexually assaulting a teenage boy in Massachusetts in the 1970s, marking the first time the disgraced ex-prelate was criminally charged with abuse.

July 29, 2021: A civil lawsuit is filed in a New Jersey court accusing McCarrick of sexually abusing a 12-year-old boy in 1986.

Au. 4, 2021: A new civil lawsuit is announced against McCarrick alleging sexual abuse during the late 1970s.

Sept. 1, 2021: Two new lawsuits are brought against McCarrick alleging sexual abuse dating to 1991.

Sept. 3, 2021: McCarrick appears in a Massachusetts district court and pleads not guilty to several charges of sexual assault.

Sept. 16, 2021: Another sex abuse lawsuit is filed against McCarrick in a New Jersey court.

Sept. 30, 2021: A New Jersey federal judge rules that the Archdiocese of Newark can be held financially responsible for the abuse committed by McCarrick.

Nov. 23, 2021: A former Catholic priest who had previously alleged McCarrick sexually abused him when he was a seminarian files a lawsuit against the accused abuser.

Jan. 13, 2023: McCarrick’s lawyers claim he is in “significant” mental decline and may not be fit to stand trial for the abuse that allegedly occurred in the 1970s.

Feb. 27, 2023: McCarrick files a motion claiming he is “legally incompetent” to stand trial for the 1970s sex abuse charges, citing “significant, worsening, and irreversible dementia.”

April 16, 2023: McCarrick is criminally charged with fourth-degree sexual assault in Wisconsin for an incident that allegedly occurred in April 1977.

June 2023: A mental health expert hired by Massachusetts says McCarrick is not competent to stand trial on the criminal sexual abuse charges in that state.

Aug. 30, 2023: A Massachusetts district judge says McCarrick is not competent to stand trial on criminal sexual abuse charges due to his dementia.

Jan 10, 2024: A Wisconsin judge suspends the criminal sexual assault case against McCarrick in that state after a psychologist hired by the court found that the former prelate is not competent to stand trial.

Dec. 27, 2024: A Wisconsin judge says the sexual assault case against McCarrick will remain paused until the laicized clergyman dies.

April 4, 2025:  McCarrick dies at 94.

This timeline was first published on CNA on Nov. 21, 2020, and was updated April 4, 2025.