His attorney says "at worst" he's a holier version of Robin Hood? Does that mean the defense's attorney believes the victims deserve to be stolen from?
He's saying at worst his client is guilty, but if he is, then he's a noble scoundrel: stealing from the rich so that the money could be used to help poor people. He's trying to imply that Fr. David Rosenberg's real crime is caring too much.
That's what he's trying to say, anyway. It's a poor statement. A simple "My client is innocent of the charges against him and looks forward to proving that in court" would have sufficed.
As a "Pillar" reader (in a good way), I now find myself personally acquainted with a priest who is the subject of "Pillar" coverage (in a bad way). Lord, have mercy!
Allow me to echo Mr. Kerr's prayers for "justice, healing, & peace." In your charity, please also pray for the repose of the soul of Fr. Kenneth McDonald, mentioned in the piece, who recently died.
It seems to me that a lot of this stuff could be avoided by a more active diocesan role in protecting retired priests with the help of volunteer attorneys/advisors/etc. As an attorney, I would be willing to volunteer my time to help with something like this.
How responsible should a bishop be for the private financial assets of his retired and incapacitated priests?
He should at least offer some fiduciary care for the priests that choose to take that route. The bishop doesn't have to do this himself but can appoint reputable lay fiduciary care organizations to offer these services.
But given the seeming lack of trust between many bishops and their priests this might not be an option.
"...an official of the Lansing diocese told The Pillar that safeguards are in place to protect parishes and other institutions from financial misconduct committed by priests. "
Good luck getting them to tell a layperson what those safeguards are.
Though it is only tangentially related to the matter at heart, Warren's comments about priests getting involved in non-profit leadership is spot-on.
Once a non-profit's activities and/or bankroll start to become substantial, it's simply a prudent move to have clergy take a backseat - it avoids tarnishing the reputation of the Church if (God forbid) the group gets exposed for doing sketchy bad stuff... which is rife in the world of non-profits.
I feel icky whenever I get solicitations in the mail from Church-adjacent non-profits and religious orders, constantly flooding my mailbox from the same groups over and over. If your religious order has so much money to keep mass-mailing people free prayer medalions/rosaries/crosses all the time, what does it say about your use of funds for your order's overseas missions to starving Sudanese kids? It makes the Church look bad.
As I noted in my comment below, Fat Eddie Arsenault, late of Manchester NH diocese, embezzled $300K and, after defrocking and prison, moved on to head a non-profit. I wonder what his resume looks like?
Yes, but have no trouble finding non-profit charities that are transparent and audited. From my parish, about once every five years or less frequently there is some form of a finance report, the names of the members of parish finance council are secret and I am sure that even as a 30 year parishioner I would never be allowed to see an audit.
Thanks for the news of the Michigan priest charged with massive theft. For a moment I thought it was an old story of priestly theft being resurrected. No, no, that was another Michigan priest, Edward Belczak, who embezzled a dead parishioner's generous bequest. I lived in Michigan for two years, so local crooks tend to catch my eye.
Michael Ryan pointed out this massive problem of clerical theft across the USA years ago and how so many parishes were wide open to theft (often linked to the priest's pelvic urges).
But still it goes on. The article mentions Father Jonathan Wehrle in Lansing who built a magnificent house out of the collection plate. I loved the way he stuffed his surplus cash in the ceiling rather than under the mattress.
Sadly not too uncommon. An elderly retired priest in my family had something similar happen...he died and then we all found out he'd left everything in his house (i.e. all his worldly possessions) to his personal care assistant who had been working with him for a year or less and tried to prevent his family from having access to him. Needless to say, it doesn't pass the sniff test, but nobody had the money or energy to go to law over it. And all the family heirlooms he had intended to give to family members? She sold them in a garage sale, and didn't even tell the family. Word got around and some relatives were able to ransom a number of items with cash (including relics!), but all in all an elderly priest was taken advantage of and harmed by a supposed "carer." Like I said, I suspect this happens more than we realize.
Wonder if there were any red flags. Say, a bishop was warned about possible misconduct but failed to take any action…could this be an agenda item for others?
His attorney says "at worst" he's a holier version of Robin Hood? Does that mean the defense's attorney believes the victims deserve to be stolen from?
Yeah, what is this attorney saying? My client is guilty but it's okay? What kind of defense attorney is this?
He's saying at worst his client is guilty, but if he is, then he's a noble scoundrel: stealing from the rich so that the money could be used to help poor people. He's trying to imply that Fr. David Rosenberg's real crime is caring too much.
That's what he's trying to say, anyway. It's a poor statement. A simple "My client is innocent of the charges against him and looks forward to proving that in court" would have sufficed.
The Dec 1 statement on the website indicates to me that the attorney is a fan of logical fallacies (I am going to look for a bingo card).
An attorney with a guilty client.
The words of Fagin in "Oliver" spring to mind:
Robin Hood, what a crook!
Gave away what he took.
Charity's fine.
Subscribe to mine.
Go out and pick a pocket or two.....
As a "Pillar" reader (in a good way), I now find myself personally acquainted with a priest who is the subject of "Pillar" coverage (in a bad way). Lord, have mercy!
Allow me to echo Mr. Kerr's prayers for "justice, healing, & peace." In your charity, please also pray for the repose of the soul of Fr. Kenneth McDonald, mentioned in the piece, who recently died.
It seems to me that a lot of this stuff could be avoided by a more active diocesan role in protecting retired priests with the help of volunteer attorneys/advisors/etc. As an attorney, I would be willing to volunteer my time to help with something like this.
Laity are not wanted.
Wait, did I correctly understand that Aubin is "credibly accused" by the fellow who robbed him?
No. But that could have been more clear. I’ll revise a bit.
Ah! In the linked article, I didn't notice anyone but Rosenberg quoted, which led me to wonder. Thanks for clarifying!
How responsible should a bishop be for the private financial assets of his retired and incapacitated priests?
He should at least offer some fiduciary care for the priests that choose to take that route. The bishop doesn't have to do this himself but can appoint reputable lay fiduciary care organizations to offer these services.
But given the seeming lack of trust between many bishops and their priests this might not be an option.
"...an official of the Lansing diocese told The Pillar that safeguards are in place to protect parishes and other institutions from financial misconduct committed by priests. "
Good luck getting them to tell a layperson what those safeguards are.
Though it is only tangentially related to the matter at heart, Warren's comments about priests getting involved in non-profit leadership is spot-on.
Once a non-profit's activities and/or bankroll start to become substantial, it's simply a prudent move to have clergy take a backseat - it avoids tarnishing the reputation of the Church if (God forbid) the group gets exposed for doing sketchy bad stuff... which is rife in the world of non-profits.
I feel icky whenever I get solicitations in the mail from Church-adjacent non-profits and religious orders, constantly flooding my mailbox from the same groups over and over. If your religious order has so much money to keep mass-mailing people free prayer medalions/rosaries/crosses all the time, what does it say about your use of funds for your order's overseas missions to starving Sudanese kids? It makes the Church look bad.
As I noted in my comment below, Fat Eddie Arsenault, late of Manchester NH diocese, embezzled $300K and, after defrocking and prison, moved on to head a non-profit. I wonder what his resume looks like?
Yes, but have no trouble finding non-profit charities that are transparent and audited. From my parish, about once every five years or less frequently there is some form of a finance report, the names of the members of parish finance council are secret and I am sure that even as a 30 year parishioner I would never be allowed to see an audit.
Thanks for the news of the Michigan priest charged with massive theft. For a moment I thought it was an old story of priestly theft being resurrected. No, no, that was another Michigan priest, Edward Belczak, who embezzled a dead parishioner's generous bequest. I lived in Michigan for two years, so local crooks tend to catch my eye.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edmi/pr/priest-pleads-guilty-stealing-money-his-former-parish
And then of course there was Fat Eddie Arsenault in Manchester, NH, who embezzled money galore, including some from a dead priest.
https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2017-04-07/pope-dismisses-new-hampshire-priest-who-embezzled-money
Fat Eddie's clerical career was mercifully over, but he has wisely changed his name and moved on to a new career as head of a non-profit!
https://nypost.com/2023/03/11/defrocked-ex-con-priest-who-stole-300k-heads-nyc-nonprofits-with-city-contracts/
Michael Ryan pointed out this massive problem of clerical theft across the USA years ago and how so many parishes were wide open to theft (often linked to the priest's pelvic urges).
https://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2005_01_06/2005_06_17_Ryan_TheSecond.htm
But still it goes on. The article mentions Father Jonathan Wehrle in Lansing who built a magnificent house out of the collection plate. I loved the way he stuffed his surplus cash in the ceiling rather than under the mattress.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5968391/63-000-ceiling-home-priest-accused-theft.html
Sadly not too uncommon. An elderly retired priest in my family had something similar happen...he died and then we all found out he'd left everything in his house (i.e. all his worldly possessions) to his personal care assistant who had been working with him for a year or less and tried to prevent his family from having access to him. Needless to say, it doesn't pass the sniff test, but nobody had the money or energy to go to law over it. And all the family heirlooms he had intended to give to family members? She sold them in a garage sale, and didn't even tell the family. Word got around and some relatives were able to ransom a number of items with cash (including relics!), but all in all an elderly priest was taken advantage of and harmed by a supposed "carer." Like I said, I suspect this happens more than we realize.
Wonder if there were any red flags. Say, a bishop was warned about possible misconduct but failed to take any action…could this be an agenda item for others?