Judicial Watch pushes for transparency in 2023 FBI memo linking extremist risk to some Catholics
Judicial Watch is demanding greater transparency regarding a 2023 FBI memo from the Richmond field office that linked "radical traditionalist" Catholics to the far-right white nationalist movement. The memo recommended developing sources within Catholic parishes offering the Traditional Latin Mass and in online "radical traditionalist" Catholic communities. Lawyers for Judicial Watch argued in a federal court hearing that the FBI has failed to fully comply with FOIA requests, releasing heavily redacted documents without providing required justifications for the redactions. Judicial Watch is particularly concerned about redactions obscuring internal communications, which they believe could reveal the extent and intent behind the memo's creation. The judge in the case, Amir H. Ali, seemed sympathetic to Judicial Watch's concerns and scheduled a status report for March 27.
3 days ago
In early 2023, the FBI's Richmond field office issued a memo linking "radical traditionalist" Catholics attending Traditional Latin Mass parishes to the far-right white nationalist movement.1
It recommended "trip wire or source development" in these communities and was retracted after leaking publicly for not meeting FBI standards.1
Judicial Watch, alongside CatholicVote Civic Action, sued the FBI for full compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests on the memo.1
Over 200 documents were released but heavily redacted without required justifications, hindering challenges to improper withholdings.1
On March 20, 2026, in federal district court, Judicial Watch lawyers argued the FBI's non-compliance, focusing on redacted internal communications suggesting broader intent beyond isolated agents.1
Judge Amir H. Ali appeared sympathetic and ordered a status report for March 27.1
The memo originated under President Biden, but redactions persist into President Trump's term despite FBI Director Kash Patel's promises of transparency during confirmation.1
Attorney Meredith DiLiberto noted no noticeable shift, expressing disappointment in the lack of change.1
Prior probes revealed FBI surveillance of a Catholic priest invoking priest-penitent privilege, undercover agents in churches, and discussions across multiple field offices.1
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the targeting a First Amendment abuse potentially warranting criminal scrutiny.1
Richmond Bishop Barry Knestout condemned the memo as a threat to religious liberty, urging prevention of future offenses.1
The Catholic Church rejects racism, as affirmed in Vatican II's Gaudium et Spes, conflicting with white nationalist ideologies.1
Assess Catholic Church’s stance on extremist risk in FBI reports
The Catholic Church maintains a firm commitment to religious liberty as an inherent human right, rooted in the dignity of the person, while unequivocally rejecting violence, coercion, or extremism in the name of religion. Although no provided sources directly address contemporary FBI reports assessing "extremist risks" within Catholic communities, Church teachings emphasize protection against unjust discrimination or surveillance based on faith, balanced against the common good and public order. These principles, drawn from Vatican II and subsequent magisterial documents, would guide any evaluation of such reports, prioritizing dialogue, mercy, and the eradication of genuine threats without infringing on conscience.
The Church teaches that religious freedom must be respected in civil society, limited only by the requirements of the common good and objective moral order, not positivist or arbitrary state measures. Vatican II's Dignitatis Humanae (referenced in the Catechism) affirms that no one may be coerced in matters of faith, and civil authority must safeguard this liberty through legal principles aligned with natural law. This stance evolved from pre-conciliar condemnations of indifferentism—such as Pius IX's Quanta Cura, which rejected "liberty of perdition" that equates truth with error—but now embraces a "hermeneutic of reform" under Benedict XVI, rehabilitating the right to religious liberty even in pluralistic societies.
Scholarly analysis reinforces this: the Church distinguishes between repudiating error and respecting the erring person, forbidding judgments on internal guilt. In contexts like U.S. government scrutiny, this implies opposition to labeling faithful Catholics (e.g., those attending Traditional Latin Mass or pro-life rallies) as "extremists" without evidence of violence, as it risks crossing into coercion. The International Theological Commission warns against religion becoming a "menace" through violence, urging self-condemnation within faiths, but insists true freedom reconciles with public order without relativistic indifference.
Catholic doctrine categorically condemns all forms of violence, including those justified religiously, as "infamies" that dishonor the Creator and poison society. Gaudium et Spes lists murder, genocide, torture, and subhuman conditions as grave evils, extending love even to enemies and calling for active mercy toward the vulnerable. The USCCB echoes this in addressing gun violence, advocating "reasonable regulations" on firearms, mental health access, and restorative justice to foster a "culture of life" over violence.
Extremism, particularly when absolutizing beliefs to root out opposition, is critiqued as a misdirected religious zeal that the Church, with its historical experience, must counter. Persecution arises from both political left (e.g., secularism on abortion) and right (e.g., Reagan-era surveillance of churches aiding immigrants, criminalizing corporal works of mercy per Matt. 25). The Church would thus scrutinize FBI reports for bias, as nativist or open-border extremes on either side contradict human dignity teachings.
All persons possess equal dignity from creation, redemption, and divine calling, demanding eradication of discrimination based on religion, among other factors. Gaudium et Spes urges reverence for every neighbor, especially the marginalized (e.g., refugees, unborn), and active solidarity. Institutions must serve human purpose, combating slavery or coercion while accommodating spiritual realities.
In assessing "extremist risks," the Church prioritizes prudence: states may restrain threats to peace, but not faith itself. USCCB statements on policy (e.g., immigration, education) signed by multiple bishops underscore collaboration for justice without endorsing overreach. Scholarly works note tensions in American Catholicism, where "evangelical Catholics" prioritize orthodoxy amid pluralism, rejecting "sectarian" labels that stifle witness.
Pre-Vatican II documents addressed errors post-Council, urging bishops to combat pernicious ideas confidentially. Liturgical reforms under Benedict XVI aimed at sobriety, not extremism, continuing under Francis. Older apologetics like Bellarmine's defend Catholic truth without violence. Collectively, sources portray the Church as resilient against worldly hatred, from left or right, calling for policies respecting dignity (e.g., Rubio/Bush immigration proposals scorned by both sides).
Summary: Absent direct sources on FBI reports, the Church's stance—grounded in religious liberty, anti-violence imperatives, and human dignity—opposes unjust profiling of Catholics as extremists while supporting legitimate measures against violence. It calls for discernment, mercy, and dialogue to protect the faithful without compromising public safety. Catholics are urged to advocate prudently, embodying Christ's command to love enemies.