Render Unto Rome by Jason Berry Read Free Book Online Page B

find a single [communication] that said ‘only for retired priests,’ ” he said. Smith maintained that the collections were used appropriately. “Every dollar that was collected was used exclusively for the needs of priests, and a great deal of it went to the needs of retired priests,” he said …
The collections were not needed for the retirement fund because returns from investments in the booming stock market provided the plan with sufficient funds. 6
    Smith was more forthcoming while under oath in a June 2002 civil deposition, after the archdiocese pulled back from agreeing to a settlement with the first wave of eighty-six victims of John Geoghan. (The cases settled that fall before the much larger victims’ group.) Plaintiff lawyers Mitchell Garabedian and William H. Gordon were focused on Cardinal Law and his Finance Council. Bill Gordon asked the questions; he zeroed in on funding streams. “I’m not a trustee,” Smith stated, “but essentially the Clergy Benefit Trust is for medical and ultimately retirement benefits for clergy.”
Is there a separate trust called the Clergy Medical Trust, then?
Clergy Medical and Hospitalization Trust is essentially, it is another trust, it is a separate legal vehicle. It is essentially the checkbook that pays those medical bills.
And the Clergy Benefit Trust in contrast to that is for—
Well, the Christmas and Easter collection monies flow into the Clergy Benefit Trust. They flow out of that trust either to the ClergyMedical Hospitalization or to the Clergy Retirement Disability Trust, and occasionally for special needs of priests for medical that wouldn’t normally be covered under the plan, the Clergy Benefit Trust would cover that.
The Medical Hospitalization Trust is essentially a checkbook. It’s the device that literally pays the bills.
    Another part of the organizational structure, the Clergy Fund Advisory Committee, had its own priest-secretary. Gordon bore down on Smith.
Is there a dollar limit when the committee must be consulted before any expense is made?
I’m not aware of any dollar limit …
Has the Clergy Benefit Trust been used to pay loans to priests to retain counsel when they’ve been involved in legal matters?
Not to my knowledge.
Which trust would produce loans to priests to retain counsel when they’re involved in legal matters?
As far as I know, there’s only one trust that has ever made any loans to any priests, and there isn’t a specific trust for legal matters. The Clergy Assistance Trust makes loans to priests who need them, and they are Boston priests only … It could be somebody’s mother died and needed to be buried. It could be, you know, any kind of family-related, personal issue. There isn’t any restriction that I know of that describes what kind of assistance they can get. 7
    Smith was describing a shell game: the money starts out beneath one shell, the Clergy Benefit Trust, after the two big dollops of contributions from the pews at Christmas and at Easter. From the Benefit Trust, a line of money slides over to the shell called Medical/Hospitalization Trust, which “is essentially a checkbook” used to pay for, among other bills, the psychiatric facilities where the child molesters were sent, at least the portion of charges not covered by ordinary health insurance. A separate Medical/Hospitalization Trust suggests a need beyond standard coverage. When legal expenses arose, the Clergy Benefit Trust shifted the funds to anothershell, the Clergy Assistance Trust, for “any kind of … personal issue,” Smith testified. “There isn’t any restriction.”
    Unaware of Smith’s deposition, Peter Borré pounced on the chancellor’s line from the Pilot article: “Every dollar … used exclusively for the needs of priests.”
    How exclusive , he wondered, did those needs get? And at what cost?
    The case of Paul Shanley was vexing. Father Shanley moved to California in 1988, in good standing courtesy of his seminary