Update on Fr. John Corapi

[Michie]

Yep.

 

[Chrystal-J]

Hey, all I know is what he said. Beyond that, I really have no opinion. I have never heard anything unorthodox from the man's mouth. Given his 20 years of faithful service, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt out of charity unless I am shown otherwise, because as of right now, no one knows anything... It might make me feel good to jump his case because I would love him to have followed in Padre's Pio's footsteps and then had this all work itself out... But that doesn't change the fact that I don't know anything at all about the situation and really should just keep my mouth shut, pray hard, and practice a little bit of humility.

I didn't mean for my comments to be directed at you personally--sorry if it came off that way. I was just addressing the subject in general. And I'm going by what Corapi has posted on his new site. So it's information that he, himself, has put out there.
Basically, I'm sad that he gave up so easily. It's only been since March when this whole situation started--and he's willing to end a 20 year priesthood over it. I've known Priests who had run-ins with parishioners that lasted years (ugly letters to the bishop, complains to the office in writing and over the phone). The Priests I knew rode it out and were proven NOT guilty in the end. The accusers were shown to be disgruntled, trouble-making parishioners who ended up moving on to a new church when they saw they weren't getting their way. I guess I wish Corapi would of at least tried to see the situation through. But, ultimately, it's his decision. If he wants to leave, that's up to him. I don't see the point in him complaining about the bishops before he leaves though.

 

[JoabAnias]

Well that clarifies the sticking point.

He still has to answer the letter.

I can't see anyone in their right mind filing for a divorce except to protect themselves. This has got to be an indication of despair, despondency and depression. So unlike him. Something must be wrong.

 

[isshinwhat]

He still has to answer the letter.

I can't see anyone in their right mind filing for a divorce except to protect themselves. This has got to be an indication of despair, despondency and depression. So unlike him. Something must be wrong.

It still never says in the correspondence that he is seeking laicization, but that he is leaving, "...active ministry and religious life." Does that mean SOLT in particular? That is how I understand it... Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Are you suggesting that if the Pope does not grant this, he will be forced to stay in the priesthood? Nobody can force a priest to exercise his priesthood, Tlf. Get real.

It would behoove you to read what you are responding to before resopnding.

Yes he can be forced to remain a priest. He cannot be forced to be active. But he CAN be forced to remain a priest and not allowed to return to lay status.

No one can force a Pope to dispense a priest from his vows. And given the changes I cited in this regard, they rarely do so.

You seem to confusing the activities of a priest with being a priest. He may no longer be active, but he is still a priest. One cannot announce they are no longer a priest and no longer be a priest. Only the Pope can do that and John Paull the II rarely did that regardless of the many petitions to do so, and I dont' see anything being different with Pope Benedict VI - who is stricter than John Paul II was.

Yes, Fr Corapi is suspended . .yes is not now practicing his priestly duties . .but that does not mean he has been discharged form his obligations and duties. Like the example of a police officer given in one of my links, who is suspended pending investigation of some serious matter, who can wait for the resolution and be returned to the force, or tender his resignation and end his employment, this is where Fr Corapi is.

UNLIKE the police man, however, Fr Corapi is not just "employed" by the Archdiocese. . . but has received a SACRAMENT that is eternal in its nature. The Policeman is only one if he is employed in that capacity. A priest is one regardless of whether or not their obligations and responsiblities to their superior are discharged. The priest remains a priest and his vows remain active.

A priest does not return to lay status simply because he has been discharged from his responsiblities, because his resignation is accepted.

He has made vows to God. Only the Pope can dispense with them.

And, as we have seen, that does not happen very often to those who so request it.

Without a doubt, he would make the decision to leave prior to petitioning Rome. It is the same with couples who decide to divorce. The actual decree is not granted until months after forming the decision and subsequently petitioning the court.

No, he cannot make the decision to leave the priesthood. He can only make the decision to leave his duties and obligations entrusted to him. He can ask to be laicized, but that is not his call to make.

He can no more make a decision to not be a priest than someone sacramentally married before God can make the decision to not be married.

One can act as thought they are not married, but in the sight of God they are still married.

A priest can act as though he is not a priest, but in the sight of God he is sitll a priest.

I remind you that he is already suspended from active priestly ministry. This suspension may or may not keep him limbo indefinitely. He needs to get on with his life, and I would not blame him for asking for a final dispensation rather than live in limbo. Either that, or stay and fight, which ultimately is his right to decide - not yours. Nor is it your place to judge his motives or decisions in this matter.

Being suspended from actively priestly ministry does not make him something other than a priest. It does not make him laity. It does not dispense with his vows. He activity is simply suspended. And even if it kept him in limbo indefinitely, that does not take away his character of being a priest before God. His ministry must be engaged in in obedience to the Church. But if he were to choose to never go back even if the suspension were lifted, all that would mean is the Bishop could then act to permanently remove his faculties as a priest.

BUT HE WOULD REMAIN A PRIEST and obligated to uphold and honor his sacramental vows, including celibacy.

He WOULD NOT become laity.

He could only be laicized by the Pope and this Pope, and our last one, very rarely do so.

This is like a pack of vultures picking the bones of a priest as if he was fair game for your judgments.

Not at all. No one is passing judgement on him in regards to the accusations. What he has done, however, is attack the Church and add scandal to scandal and people are confused. Looking at this clamly and objectively, looking at what things mean, is really the opposite of your improper characterization.

 

[JoabAnias]

It still never says in the correspondence that he is seeking laicization, but that he is leaving, "...active ministry and religious life." Does that mean SOLT in particular? That is how I understand it... Time will tell, I suppose.

Right, thats what I assumed from the end where the article said he would be helped to do so if he confirmed that intention. At least thats what I read "leaving religious life" to mean. What it looks like to me is that he assumes he will get no vindication from the Bishop so has been encouraged to take it to the civil courts but can't do that without resigning. It seems he has lawyers who are advising him. All I can say is woe to his accuser if she lied. She will be held accountable in a civil court. The Bishop could never do that. If he is exonerated I see no reason he could not be reinstated as a priest at a later date. Thats why I suggested earlier on that this may set a precedent for wrongly accused priests to resign and defend themselves through the civil courts, which might just be a good thing.

 

[isshinwhat]

Right, thats what I assumed from the end where the article said he would be helped to do so if he confirmed that intention. At least thats what I read "leaving religious life" to mean. What it looks like to me is that he assumes he will get no vindication from the Bishop so has been encouraged to take it to the civil courts but can't do that without resigning. It seems he has lawyers who are advising him. All I can say is woe to his accuser if she lied. She will be held accountable in a civil court. The Bishop could never do that. If he is exonerated I see no reason he could not be reinstated as a priest at a later date. Thats why I suggested earlier on that this may set a precedent for wrongly accused priests to resign and defend themselves through the civil courts, which might just be a good thing.

Bishop Gracida, the bishop emeritus of Corpus Christi, said in his post that:

I believe that he is justified in not seeking to clear his name through a canonical process; at the present time such processes are very flawed in most dioceses. Rather I would like to believe that he intends to try to clear his name through the civil courts. Since I believe that his accuser is a former manager of his media company who he terminated with some kind termination agreement, and since she has evidently sought revenge for her termination by writing to the Bishop of Corpus Christi denouncing Father John, I believe that it is possible for him to do so and I wish him every success in such an endeavor. The basis for his lawsuit would probably be defamation of character, libel, extortion, breech of contract, or whatever.

This coming from the man who established the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity as a diocesan institute.

 

[LinuxUser]

Excuse me for jumping in again. I found some more things out on the web

I was angry about all this until I became aware of the extent to which our Church and our priests have been subjected to rampant fraud. As unjust as the Father Corapi case is, it is at least current. He and his supporters at least have an opportunity to gather information that could point to less than stellar motives for his accuser’s claims. Already, the claim has has surfaced that his accuser — whose name, to date, has been shielded from public scrutiny — had previously threatened to “destroy” Father Corapi. If clear evidence of guilt is not forthcoming soon, then it is time for the true voice of the faithful to help restore Fr. John Corapi’s good name and ministry.

Mounting any defense at all, however, is simply not a luxury that most accused priests have had. In the early 1990s, insurance companies ended coverage for damages when Catholic institutions were sued in sex abuse claims. Since then, a full seventy percent of the claims against priests have alleged abuse that is decades old, and for which no clear evidence of either guilt or innocence could possibly exist.

In all claims against priests in the United States since 2002, the accused priests – if they are even still living – have been placed on “administrative leave,” but often with little hope of ever clearing their names. Their bishops assure them and the public that their suspensions are “pending investigation,” but there is often no legitimate investigation. How could there be after the passage of decades? Many of the claims are deemed “credible” solely because a diocese fears litigation and decides to settle.

Father John Corapi and the State of Due Process for Accused Priests | Catholic Lane

 

[sneezingleopard]

In Defense of Father John Corapi | improperium Christi



This brings up a good point. Is it possible to not seek laicization, accept the suspension of his faculties, and continue to minister as John Corapi? Has he actually said anywhere that he is leaving the priesthood, or only that he is, "not going to be involved in public ministry as a priest any longer?"

Edit: This seems to be backed by this statement:



A FEW THOUGHTS ON FATHER CORAPI’S ANNOUNCEMENT YESTERDAY | ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP

I was thinking about this same exact point. Thanks for making it! To me it doesn't sound like he is saying "I"ve had enough, I'm not going to be a priest or a catholic anymore" It sounds more like he is accepting the hand that has been dealt to him although an unfair hand. He's merely doing the best he can in the circumstances he's been given. I also read that line saying he won't be involved in public ministry as a preist any longer and I was kind fo stumped by it. Everyone seems to be saying he is throwing away the priesthood but I don't think that is the case. The reality is that is the only line I have seen on the matter thus far adn it just isn't clear enough to know what he means by that. Hoping for more info soon so we can lay some questions to rest. Of course more postings from Fr. COrapi may just lead to more questions. Anyway, it's probably best for the time being that we all just take thign slowly and not rush to conlcusions based on sooo little information. I think most of the negativity so far ha sbeen thign swe all have read into the situation rather than something he has actually said or meant to communicate.
-Matthew

 

[Michie]

For Priests of my generation, Fr. Corapi has been a well-known figure. A frequent face on EWTN, we are used to getting his name mentioned to us by regular church-goers. "I love watching Father Corapi" is something we're all used to hearing.


Maybe that's why I've always had a small amount of resentment towards him.

It's not about his shows. I can honestly say I have never really sat through a Fr. Corapi TV show, but from what I have seen and heard his stuff is pretty orthodox. His voice has always seemed a bit "over the top", but no more than other Priests and Deacons I've known that have a "Mass voice" and a "Regular voice". The truth is his voice has always reminded me of the public speaking voice of Jim McGreevey, and I think anyone who has heard both of them speak from behind a podium will attest to this. What I resented about Father C. is probably the same resentment infantry soldiers have towards fighter pilots: While infantry soldiers are "on the ground" fighting for every square inch of ground to gain in the battle, the pilots take off from someplace behind the battle lines, fly over, drop a few bombs, then go back to land at the safe spot. To some extent, it's easy to be orthodox if you have gigs like this. You show up at an event. Your audience is almost completely those who feel the same way as you do, you make them laugh, get serious, tell Catholics what the liberals are doing wrong, say Mass, sign some autographs, and you're done and out of the town 6 hours after you arrived. Oh yeah, and you get paid.


When this is all said and done, my hunch is that it's not going to be about sex, it's going to be about money. This guy lives on a ranch in Montana. Once I went searching for information on his website about the possibility of having him speak in a parish I was assigned to at the time. The fee was something like $3,000, plus expenses (travel to and from Montana, which can't be cheap).

Continued- Fr. Corapi and the bigger issue...

 

[sneezingleopard]

Another interesting note, the working title of his autobiography, "The Black Sheepdog," has been discussed over the last five years, and has been trademarked for over a year now. It is not some new, off-the-deep-end revelation of his that marks a psychological fall...

SO funny, I was seriously wondering about this too but didn't have time to look into it. I was thinking that he probably didn't just whip out this book in the last foru months so it made sense tha maybe it went back before this mess. Then I did read on Jimmy akin's blog that Corapi did start writting the book after this all started which he took as a sign that as soon as Corpai hear dof the accusations he started thinking of a way around the mess he was in. I got the feeling that Jimmy was just writting that off the cuff though and didn't really know the deatils about how the book was started.
-Matthew

 

[BAFRIEND]

If he is exonerated I see no reason he could not be reinstated as a priest at a later date. Thats why I suggested earlier on that this may set a precedent for wrongly accused priests to resign and defend themselves through the civil courts, which might just be a good thing.

you just happen to be forgetting one tiny insy weensy little point

money

father corapi is a multi-millionaire living on his ranch in montana

most priests, if their are lucky, probably would run out of money in 3 months and would lose their charity pension

in addition to that- most priests have their education paid for by the diocese where they work and if they leave the priesthood would most likely by contract agreement have to pay back all the money, even though most of it came from special collections during daily masses- it could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars for an education which is basically useless outside the Church

finally, nine times out of ten the person you want to sue has no money- good like finding a lawyer who is going to sue a turnip

 

[isshinwhat]

you just happen to be forgetting one tiny insy weensy little point

money

father corapi is a multi-millionaire living on his ranch in montana

most priests, if their are lucky, probably would run out of money in 3 months and would lose their charity pension

in addition to that- most priests have their education paid for by the diocese where they work and if they leave the priesthood would most likely by contract agreement have to pay back all the money, even though most of it came from special collections during daily masses- it could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars for an education which is basically useless outside the Church

finally, nine times out of ten the person you want to sue has no money- good like finding a lawyer who is going to sue a turnip

The suit is already moving forward.

 

[Chrystal-J]

The suit is already moving forward.

Corapi is going to sue the Catholic church?

 

[BAFRIEND]

The suit is already moving forward.

that was not the point of my post

the point of the post is that corapi is the exception to the rule because by suing people and whistle-blowing he is wealthy

most priests are not so fortunate

 

[isshinwhat]

Corapi is going to sue the Catholic church?

The lady.

 

[Chrystal-J]

The lady.

Okay...thanks for clearing that up!

 

[isshinwhat]

Okay...thanks for clearing that up!

 

[MariaRegina]

Another interesting note, the working title of his autobiography, "The Black Sheepdog," has been discussed over the last five years, and has been trademarked for over a year now. It is not some new, off-the-deep-end revelation of his that marks a psychological fall...

Interesting. Very interesting.

He is acknowledging that he is a sinner. That is a mark of humility.

He also wants to protect the flock. That shows dedication.

My prayers for him.

 

[thereselittleflower]

In Defense of Father John Corapi | improperium Christi



This brings up a good point. Is it possible to not seek laicization, accept the suspension of his faculties, and continue to minister as John Corapi? Has he actually said anywhere that he is leaving the priesthood, or only that he is, "not going to be involved in public ministry as a priest any longer?"

Edit: This seems to be backed by this statement:



A FEW THOUGHTS ON FATHER CORAPI’S ANNOUNCEMENT YESTERDAY | ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP

Yes, he can as himself, not as a priest, but as himself, for no one can abridge his free will. But if he wants an apostalate and to be recognized by the Church in such a manner to give validity to such a ministry, he has to seek that from the Church . . Would he get it after such statements as he has made agaisnt the Church, verbally slapping the Church he claims to love? I highly doubt it.


The Saints have shown us the way to handle such situations as he finds himself in.

Padre Pio was suspended for OVER TWO YEARS! what was his response?

The event of personal significance consisted of a period of segregation imposed on him by order of the ecclesiastical authorities. On the evening of 9 June 1931, Padre Pio received an order that suspended his ministry except for holy Mass but even that he had to celebrate in an internal chapel of the friary, with only a server present. When he found out about the order Padre Pio said only: "May God's will be done!" His life during this period of segregation was as follows: about two hours for the celebration of holy Mass; prayer in the choir stalls until midday, about one hour of study in the library and in the afternoon, prayer from vesper until midnight. This period of segregation lasted until 15th July 1933.

​

What about St John of the Cross?

St. John of the Cross was taken prisoner in December, 1577, from his chaplain's house at the Convent of the Incarnation in Avila and brought to Toledo. He judged rightly that the decrees of Piacenza, which were read to him, referred only to houses founded without the Prior General's permission. But he would not renounce the Reform, as he was called on to do. Therefore, he was termed rebellious and contumacious.

He was imprisoned in the monastery in Toledo in a room ten feet by six, with a very small slit high in the wall being his only source of light. The room was really nothing but a large closet. Here St. John was locked in for nine months, suffering from the cold in the winter and the stifling heat in the summer. When he was brought out, it was to take his meal of bread and water and sometimes sardines, kneeling in the refectory, and to hear the upbraidings of the Prior. After the meal on Fridays, he had to bare his shoulders and undergo the circular discipline for the space of a Miserere. Each person present struck him in turn with a lash. St. John bore the scars of these beatings throughout his life.

There were other cruelties, for the conversation outside the dark cell dwelt on the complete crushing of the Reform. All the letters of St. Teresa of Avila to the King of Spain, Philip II, and others were to no avail. No one even knew where John was kept. "I do not know how it comes about that there is never anyone who remembers this holy man," she complained in one letter.

​

From this was born a great jewel of Catholic mystic writing:

In the darkness of this cell, St. John of the Cross composed and committed to memory some of his greatest poems, including most of his book, The Spiritual Canticle, which is 40 stanzas in length. On August 14, when the Prior, the stern Fray Maldonaldo, came to St. John's cell and asked what he was thinking about that he did not rise, St. John replied, "That tomorrow is Our Lady's feast and how much I should love to say Mass." "Not while I am here," the Prior replied.

Later, after his incarceration was over, St. John of the Cross never said a word against those who had treated him so badly. "They did it because they did not understand," he said in excuse. He bore no ill-feeling toward his "jailers," for his soul in its most inward part was unruffled and at peace and dwelt with God.

A change in jailers after six months brought a more lenient friar to be his keeper. But he was torn by doubt as to what was God's Will: Should he try to escape, or was it the will of God for him to die here? His searching prayer was answered by the conviction that he should escape. So he began to plan. While the others were at table, the more lenient young Father, Juan de Santa Maria, allowed St. John to help clean the cell. This included the liberty of walking down the corridor outside the room onto which his prison closet opened in order to empty the night pail. The jailer had also given St. John a needle and thread to mend his clothing. He tied a small stone to the thread and measured the distance to the ground from a window in the corridor. Back in his cell, he sewed his blankets together and found that they would, if used as a rope, reach to within 11 feet of the ground - close enough to permit a jump. Little by little he had also loosened the screws in the padlock outside the cell. On the night he planned to escape, two visiting friars happened to be sleeping in the room outside. They awoke when the padlock fell when St. John shook it, but they went back to sleep again, their sleepy eyes perhaps being closed by a wide-awake angel.

St. John stepped between the friars and silently let himself out through the window and down on his improvised rope. Had he landed two feet farther out from the building, he would have fallen to the rocky banks of the Tagus River below. He next found himself in a court surrounded by walls; he was almost ready to give up, but he finally succeeded in climbing one of the walls and was able to drop into an alleyway of the city. After daybreak, he found the convent of the Discalced Carmelite nuns, who sheltered him and later found a temporary refuge for him in the Hospital of Santa Cruz, very close to the monastery from which he had escaped. The friars from the monastery had come to the convent looking for him while he was there, and now little knew that the emaciated, nearly dead object of their search was being nursed back to life not a stone's throw away.

http://www.tanbooks.com/doct/john_the_cross.htm

​

These are our most excellent examples.

What has Fr Coprapi said?

What matters is that we run the race to the finish line and fight the good fight. Don’t “go with the flow,” for as the great Archbishop Fulton Sheen reminds us, “Dead bodies float downstream.” More than ever we shall have to be strong in the faith. Regular and worthy reception of the sacraments, constant prayer, and rigorous study of the faith is now essential, nor merely a luxury. . . .

Many saints will be forged in the crucible of the coming years. Make sure you are among them.
​

1/14/11
Courageous Priests:
.
Many Saints Will Be Forged In The Crucible!
From Fr. Corapi:
​

http://ingodscompany2.blogspot.com/2011/01/father-corapi-in-coming-years.html



​