Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Black SheepDogI am sincerely thankful to all of you that have been kind and charitable, and also those that have perhaps been something less than that. Everyone has their opinions, and a perfect right to them. I respect that. Knowledge is a great thing, but as the old saying goes, “A little knowledge can be dangerous.” There is a dilemma that we face in the information age: On the one hand we want to use all of the marvelous technology we have. On the other hand, we don’t want to end up guilty of scarcely having a single unpublished thought. We have to say something, but we can’t say everything.
I think it’s a bit too easy to arrive at an erroneous conclusion when you base it on a fallacious presupposition. For instance, some very kind and fine people assume that I have “left the Church.” Please, understand this, I have not left the Church. I love the Catholic Church and would not “leave the Church.” I have resigned from public ministry, which is rather anticlimactic to be sure since I was out of it anyhow due to the suspension or “administrative leave,” which is tantamount to suspension. There are elements of this that you don’t know about, and that’s not your fault.
Once a man is ordained a priest he remains a priest for all eternity. Holy Orders is one of the three sacraments that imprints an indelible mark on the soul. What the Church can give or remove is “faculties”, which authorizes the person to publicly administer the sacraments. I always cringe when I hear “he’s not a priest anymore.” If he ever was, he still is. What they mean is that he is not functioning in the normal way most priests function, that is, publicly administering the sacraments. Most folks’ contact with priests is the parish priest. They come in contact with him primarily when he administers the sacraments.
A priest is ordained primarily to confect the Eucharist. A validly ordained priest can do this in the normal setting of a parish or community celebration of the holy Eucharist, or in private, as I have done for twenty years. It has the same power. The power is not from how many people are present, it is from the same sacrifice of Calvary made present in time and space. The celebration of the sacraments is a monumentally noble, holy, and powerful thing. Please don’t misunderstand me and think I believe anything less than that. Each of us is called to a unique way of serving God and society. Certainly I was called to be a priest, but not as a parish priest, and that is not out of character with the history and tradition of the Church. St. Paul was a mission preacher basically. He traveled widely and preached. He did not function like a parish priest, at one time almost boasting that he thanked God that he hadn’t baptized many of them as he didn’t want to share in their sins. He was not demeaning the sacrament, just thankful he wouldn’t have to answer to God for having some share in profaning such a holy state of life.
My mission was discerned by my legitimate superior in the Church long before I was ordained. It was preaching. He, Fr. James Flanagan, told me this in 1987. I was ordained in 1991. He said it would be a huge mistake for me to ever be constrained by a parish or conventional way of life in one place. I did not take this upon myself. It was given to me by the Church and I was sent. Please don’t think I don’t value the sacraments. I do. However, the public administration of the sacraments was never what the Church told me to do. They sent me to preach. The two are not mutually exclusive. They are complimentary. Not all of the members of the Body of Christ are the same, but they are all necessary, noble, and holy.
Some of you have thought I might have acted too fast and not given the Church enough time to complete their investigation. You could be right, but you also don’t know the facts like I do. The utter disregard for our reasonable requests and certain statements made by the lawyer for the Society of Our Lady confirmed to us that they would not complete the investigation so long as I insisted in exercising my civil and human rights. That is a dead horse. Why beat it? My lawyers would not allow me to continue unless ten questions were answered regarding the nature of the process—simple reasonable questions. They ignored the request for 6 weeks and still ignore it. These weren’t rocket science questions. At a future time we’ll publish the entire letter and the questions.
For about ten years I have been attacked, threatened, and endured extortion attempts. The leadership of the Church never lifted a finger to help me in any way with this. Every time someone gets angry with me or decides they want a payday I have to go through hell with no help from the leadership of the Church. I admit I have grown weary of that. The trauma created by all of the sexual abuse of minors scandals has warped the judgment of some in authority. They are running scared. I believe in my case they panicked. “We don’t know if the dog is rabid, but let’s shoot him in the head just in case.” Well, this black sheep of a sheepdog has been “shot in the head” before and lived to tell about it. I’ll be telling about it for awhile longer.
The name “The Black Sheep Dog” is the title of my autobiography, a title which I came up with about a year and a half ago. That title was, by the way, stolen by a person who worked for me while they were working for me, attempting to secure internet domain names under that title. That is in effect a violation of federal intellectual property laws since I have both registered trademarks and copyright on that title. The title is simply the combination of a black sheep, that would be me; and a sheepdog, that would also be me. The concept of a sheepdog guarding the flock is certainly biblical and also an idea I gleaned from an article from LTC Dave Grossman, which we’ll post for you to read at a future date, or you can read it on the internet where it has been circulating for some time.
Listen my friends, I realize this situation is less than ideal. I don’t like it either, but under the circumstances I honestly believed and still do that I had one of two choices to make:
1. Crawl under a rock and quietly die; or
2. Don’t crawl under the rock and don’t die. I feel that I still have something to offer.
The leadership of the Church has made it clear to me they don’t want me anymore. They have a right to do that and I have to accept that. So, I’ll do what I can outside of the Church. I’m not leaving the Church. I am simply doing something else in life so that I won’t wither up and die, and so that you can still derive some benefit from my gifts from God. It may not be as good as before, or it may be better. The only thing I know for sure is that I’m not going to disobey the Church and attempt to “minister” as a priest, and I’m not going to lay down and die. I’m not ready to do that just yet. As a matter of fact, you might be pleasantly surprised at what’s in our future. Stay in touch. We may not have the old meeting places anymore, but we have some new ones and I would like to meet you there. Until next time this is the Black SheepDog, unleashed and very much alive.
It is a shame to see this thread re-opened. It should have been closed immediately it was started.
As I said elsewhere - none of us know the full facts , we cannot and should not make any judgements , therefore, on the perceived rights and wrongs of this matter.
All those who post here are just putting their own thoughts on public view, without being in possession of the complete story - this just allows rumours to spread and grow .
Corapi has caused the scandal. His constant preaching against Liberals and his adamant stance that we should be obedient to the Institutional church, but the first hint of adversity and Corapi heads for the hills. His website is all about him and HIS gifts. It is Corapi that has opened himself up to scrutiny and public scorn.
Detraction requires that someone be informed of something negative about someone they did not already know.
detraction . . discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them
I did not already know about John Corapi until I read this thread .
There are many more words on this thread than simply the words of John Corapi , and many of these words are detraction , and possibly calumny .
[/indent]
detraction . . discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them
cal·um·ny/ˈkaləmnē/Noun
1. The making of false and defamatory statements in order to damage someone's reputation; slander.
2. A false and slanderous statement
Although I know very little about Fr. Corapi, it seems as if he is a modern day St. Augustine.
What a model he is for those who have struggled with addictions and sexual sins, and recovered from homelessness and gained the courage to begin a new life.
What an encouragement for parents who see their adult children struggling, knowing that the challenges God places in their path might be necessary detours in their road to sainthood.
The "goodie-goodie" saints (Therese of Lisieux, for example) are difficult for many people to relate to. The "goodie-goodie" priests and sisters who discovered their vocations after being the presidents of their sodalities in Catholic high schools are difficult for many of us to relate to.
But for many of us, someone like Fr. Corapi, who has successfully slain many more demons than most of us will ever encounter, is a sign that God's abundant grace is there...
I am sorry that he has one more cross to bear.
I find this to be an interesting twist of scripture .
When did Paul ever take anyone to court for such things?
Where does Paul go on and on and on about the failures of such people?
I listened to Corapi's 2nd address, and he went on and on and on and on about this woman, about how horrible a drunk she was, etc, etc, etc. . most of his speach semed to be about her . .I found it revolting - and he is taking her to court .. . the way he talked about her, and how wide spread his words may become, may have compromised the case against her presumed innoncence until proven guilty and ensured she cannot get a fair trial, as she will have already been tried by public opinion based on his vitrol against her.
Did Paul do any of that? No. A single comment here or there is nothing like Corapi's rant.
What did Paul do to ensure justice was done?
According to what you posted above:the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. - 2 Timothy 4:14What has Corapi done?
There is no objective valid reason - the key word is objective.
He has a court case. . that is where the trial happens, not in the public eye.
There is no need for us to know the details for him to have a fair trial, actually for her to have a fair trial, for he is not being taken to court, she is.
In fact, by disclosing such details and impugning her character in such terrible ways, wether he is right about his impressions of her or not, could actually work to deny her a fair trial, for these accusations and assertions are becoming widely known, through his own efforts, and prejudice those chosen to determine her guilt or innocence.
Thus there can be NO OBJECTIVELY valid reason to disclose her sins to thsoe who did not know of them.
Revealing the content of these tapes, revealing her character flaws, her sins, DOES NOT PROVE his innocence. It makes him look vindictive, self serving, and cruel.[quote/]
It went public because all cases against priests go public since the media spotlight is already on the Church regarding priests in scandals. Secondly this was all started by the allegations of this unknown woman. The issues of bringing up this woman's character does have importance, as if it is proven she is mentally unstable, which from reports it shows she is as she was known to attack employees and make threats. If she was mentally unstable everything changes regarding her case. She may have been consumed with revenge regarding the issue with her job with him or her employers. But you cross the line when you seek to ruin someones job and career by actively promoting libel and slander in order to get back and someone.
Don't cry if you liberal and slander someone and end up in court for it. People take each other to court for defamation all the time.
You mean libel?There is no objective valid reason - the key word is objective.
He has a court case. . that is where the trial happens, not in the public eye.
There is no need for us to know the details for him to have a fair trial, actually for her to have a fair trial, for he is not being taken to court, she is.
In fact, by disclosing such details and impugning her character in such terrible ways, wether he is right about his impressions of her or not, could actually work to deny her a fair trial, for these accusations and assertions are becoming widely known, through his own efforts, and prejudice those chosen to determine her guilt or innocence.
Thus there can be NO OBJECTIVELY valid reason to disclose her sins to thsoe who did not know of them.
Revealing the content of these tapes, revealing her character flaws, her sins, DOES NOT PROVE his innocence. It makes him look vindictive, self serving, and cruel.[quote/]
It went public because all cases against priests go public since the media spotlight is already on the Church regarding priests in scandals. Secondly this was all started by the allegations of this unknown woman. The issues of bringing up this woman's character does have importance, as if it is proven she is mentally unstable, which from reports it shows she is as she was known to attack employees and make threats. If she was mentally unstable everything changes regarding her case. She may have been consumed with revenge regarding the issue with her job with him or her employers. But you cross the line when you seek to ruin someones job and career by actively promoting libel and slander in order to get back and someone.
Don't cry if you liberal and slander someone and end up in court for it. People take each other to court for defamation all the time.
You mean libel?
lol that word tends to be ingraved in many catholics minds lol
lol that word tends to be ingraved in many catholics minds lol
What can a victim of false witness, libel, and poisonous gossip do?
Yes, Paul did go on about the falures many times of laypeoples. I already showed you examples of Alexander the metalworker and Philetus. Same thing with Peter and Simon Magus, and Ananias and Saphhira who dropped dead before him by trying to lie to him about their donations. The book of Revelation is around 1/3 about the failures of the laypeoples in the 7 churches in lydia
Seriously, this woman ruined this man's career by her poisonous gossip.
It went public because all cases against priests go public since the media spotlight is already on the Church regarding priests in scandals.
Secondly this was all started by the allegations of this unknown woman. The issues of bringing up this woman's character does have importance, as if it is proven she is mentally unstable, which from reports it shows she is as she was known to attack employees and make threats. If she was mentally unstable everything changes regarding her case. She may have been consumed with revenge regarding the issue with her job with him or her employers. But you cross the line when you seek to ruin someones job and career by actively promoting libel and slander in order to get back and someone.
Don't cry if you liberal and slander someone and end up in court for it. People take each other to court for defamation all the time.
Wait a moment.
How do you know she gave false witness?
How do you KNOW one way or the other?
You don't. NONE of us do.
For you to say she gave false witness, lilbel, and poisonous gossip is itsleff calumny or at best destraction.
YOU DO NOT KNOW.
And she did NOT gossip about anything. Letters were sent to Bishops. That is not gossip.
But what you are saying above IS gossip.
It was Fr Corapi himself who made it public knowledge what he was accused of and it was FR CORAPI who made public HIS allegations against her.
Please, don't act as if you know what is secret and hidden.
First, PRIVATE LETTERS to Bishops are NOT gossip. You are maligning someone who you have no true idea is even lying.
Second, she did not ruin his career - and what a way to refer to the priesthood. The priesthood is not a "career" no more than beinga husband is a "career" . . it is a way of life. . .
Who ruined this? He did by not submitting to the Church's authority and following in the footsteps of saints such as St John of the Cross, St Pio, etc, and accept the Church disciplines imposed, and carry his cross, which could have born UNTOLD FRUIT in his life and the lives of others.
He was given a precious gift, to walk in Jesus' footsteps - and what did Jesus do when falsely accused? He opened not his mouth. Yet Fr Corapi tossed this gift to the wayside and is doing it "my way"
And this is it in a nutshell.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?