Despite being a lapsed Catholic, hopeless materialist and lifelong cynic, I always thought well of the Franciscans. I thought their patron is the coolest of all Catholic saints, their modesty is appealing and all the Franciscan friars I got to know were much more likeable than the typical Catholic cleric. And now this. Franciscan friars embezzling tens of millions of dollars by means of dealing in arms and drugs, bringing the order to the brink of bancrupty. I’m speechless.
I don’t really care for Catholicism any more; but from that report the friars weren’t actually engaging on moving drugs and guns as in some C-movie set in Mexico in the last two centuries, but the finance friars had invested in Swiss shell companies which were so engaged.
Similar to those unfortunates who relied on poor old Bernie Madoff to get them 12%. And I’m sure many people unwittingly invest with the most unpleasant exploiters on Wall Street and the City of London through solid financial advice.
Of course in both those cases no-one would have cared a hang provided they continued to pay out like a broke slot machine.
Of course they weren’t selling guns over the counter, but a little background check about what they were investing in would’ve been a good idea, perhaps?
I googled around a little and everything seemed to be based on the letter that the new Minister General of the order, Bro. Michael A. Perry, OFM, posted tothe order’s website12/17. The only bits that have been added by journalists are fragmentary - the order owns a hotel, there are Swiss accounts, there are “island” accounts or companies, there are shell companies, someone is shipping arms, the money was “lost” in the renovation of the hotel.
It’s been two days since the announcement, so I’m not sure how accurate any of the bits and pieces are.
The letter sort of implies that the problems came to light after a new Minister General called for a deep audit. We do not know if there was anything that prompted the call. We do not know which “civil authorities” have been called in. We do not know whether the “people who are not Franciscan but who appear to have played a central role” are lay people or from other orders.
We don’t know if they got taken for a ride, or if someone inside was cutting corners and/or empire building.
I like the fact that it was an internal audit that uncovered the problem, and that the problem is being revealed while it’s still being explored and dealt with. I like the fact that civil authorities have been notified. I like the fact that the letter calls for transparency, and I’m not going to be upset if they wait until they feel like they know the full extent of the problem before they divulge more information. I’ll save my disappointment for later, when they’ve pieced together who did what.
I also think he chose an appropriate verse to quote at the beginning of the letter.
I’m not entirely sure I agree that a little background check would have uncovered anything, or that it wasn’t done.
An audit did uncover the problems, but an audit is a much more intensive process than a simple background check.
Can you explain specifically what steps weren’t taken?
Can you explain why you said in your OP that “…Franciscan friars [were] embezzling tens of millions of dollars?” I don’t find any support in the linked article for that claim – was it another source?
The quote from the telegraph article I linked to was
I concede that it doesn’t say that the embezzlement was done by friars, but it is implied and I read that in another article. Looking for a cite now, coming back when I found it.
One more cite from the Guardian:
And from a Catholic source:
The more detailed article says specifically:
My question is: does the phrase “questionable financial activities” refer to the decision to invest in companies that turned out to be shady, or does it mean that the monks themselves embezzled?
I have to admit that I had to look up what a shell company is, but the wiki article taught me that it should be shady enough to not deal with it for an institution like the Franciscan order. For the other question, I know I’ve read somewhere that friars were personally involved in embezzlement, but I can’t find the cite again (I’ve read a lot about it this night). I’m sure we all get better information the next days.
Aren’t the Franciscans the order that takes a vow of poverty? If so, then why should bankruptcy be much of a bother? Maybe they’ll get back to their roots.
Arms trading? I’d expect this sort of thing from the Dominicans, but not the Franciscans.
INDIVIDUAL poverty. None of the holy orders vows to institutional poverty, otherwise they’d have no way of maintaining life for their population of personally indigent members. Or, as Sister Mary Annette from Nunsense says, “We can HAVE anything. We just can’t OWN it!”
I see. So they can be poor but run up huge expense accounts. Hmm.
Exactly. What would Francis have thought of investing, full stop?
Me too, so I was very disappointed to learn about Miroslav Majstorovic
No, it’s extremely costly to maintain a staff for whom the order is wholly responsible. Especially given that most are elderly and thus that much more costly in health care, living costs etc.
My uncle was a priest who taught in Haiti for nearly 50 years, with another order that also takes a vow of poverty. All of the possessions in his room at the order’s retirement home would fit in a banker’s box with room for a couple of basketballs, but the order provides exceptional life and health care, at a cost I would not care to guess.
Filipovic was expelled from the Franciscan Order before the war had ended,[2] but not excommunicated by the Catholic Church. :rolleyes:
When I tried to use that link, it turned out to be missing the terminal ‘c’, giving the message
From the article, it seems he was innocent of financial wrongdoing.
Yeah, this is a good question. Depending on the situation (e.g. jurisdiction, exact documents signed, organizational bylaws, etc.), fiduciaries who are responsible for investing someone else’s money (e.g. monks investing money on behalf of their order) often have a responsibility to perform “due diligence” on the investments they make in order to help preserve the money. So, a “questionable” financial activity could be nothing more than buying Conglom-O stock without reading the Annual Report or buying Philippine government bonds despite a policy requiring the purchase of bonds rated BB or above.