Monday, May 12, 2008

Money Missing at St. John Vianney Parish

The former pastor of St. John Vianney Parish in Brookfield, Father Leonard Van Vlaenderen, MAY be involved in more wrongdoing than at first suspected.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:


A preliminary audit of a large Brookfield Catholic church has raised "grave concerns" about the possibility that cash donated during weekly services over an extended period could be missing, parishioners were told in a letter sent by the parish administrator.

Father Paul Hartmann, pastor of St. John Vianney in Brookfield, declined Friday to speculate on how much money could be missing or over what period of time it could have been taken. Neither police nor the Waukesha County district attorney's office has been involved in the investigation.

Three members of the parish, one of the largest in the Milwaukee Archdiocese, began the preliminary inquiry in early December, a short time after then-pastor Father Leonard Van Vlaenderen was arrested and charged with possession of cocaine, a misdemeanor. He entered a no-contest plea to the charge and is scheduled to be sentenced this month.

The three parishioners, who were not named, asked that professional outside auditors be called in for a more detailed analysis of parish finances after finding patterns that raised concerns, Hartmann said. The accounting firm that has been hired to do the job is Virchow, Krause & Co.

In his letter, Hartmann cautioned parishioners not to jump to conclusions.

"Sadly, since there are yet no definitive proofs about the degree of the problem or who, if anyone, is culpable, the very act of keeping you informed sets the stage for more speculation and rumors," Hartmann wrote. "I implore all of you: Please do not start down that path."

The cause for concern, he said, is circumstantial but grave enough that archdiocesan officials, church lawyers and insurers as well as the district attorney's office and police could be involved.

Hartmann said Friday that the investigation is going back to at least 2000, not because it appears that problems go back that far but to provide a basis for comparison.

I understand Fr. Paul's plea to refrain from speculation and rumors.

It certainly wouldn't be right to assume that Fr. Len was taking money from the church to support his drug habit.

However, given the revelations about Fr. Len, parishioners have reason to wonder if that's the explanation when they're told that an audit has raised "grave concerns" about missing money.

The parish is accountable to its members. They support the parish. It's their money. They have the right to know if it has been misused.


They also have the right to speculate about possible reasons for the missing cash.

2 comments:

J. Gravelle said...

I don't know that "it wouldn't be right" to make that assumption.

As a former (ab)user, I can only offer that the presumption is not only within the realm of possibility, but sits squarely within the domain of the probable.

I know this look. It used to stare back at me. It's the face suffering a (seemingly) endless cycle of hopelessness and disdain driven by anger and despair.

An addict might warrant our compassion, but we needn't let our sympathy blind us to the obvious...


-jjg
DailyScoff.com

Mary said...

I don't think it is right to assume that Fr. Len is responsible.

It may be likely, and it's fair to speculate. But it should be understood that at this point it's just speculation.

I'm not suggesting being blind at all.

BTW, I'm glad to hear you're a FORMER "(ab)user."