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.
What?
" Given that he is innocent of the charges leveled against him,"
In what universe?
From that response:
Regarding the charge of sexual improprietyThis song of greed has been sung many times before. I have never had any promiscuous or even inappropriate relations with her. Never.
Did she claim it was with her? Or with women? From what I remember, it was the latter, and people assumed it was with her.
This is an example of obfuscation . . the statement may be true, but it does not address the accusation of sexual impropriety.
I can't believe anything he said in that statement.
No assumption. The contents of the letter were made public in Corapi's complaint. She claimed he had relations with her, her sister, and another woman.
Why would a priest bribe someone with $100,000 to sign a rigid and strange non disclosure agreement, abridging their rights to go to the bishops with information the Church requires we supply to Bishops?One more thing to add, the lady making the claims is the prostitute who says they did drugs together. I would imagine that all of this would have been privileged information had Father Corapi not moved forward with a civil suit which made all of this public domain long before SOLT made their statement...
http://www.snapnetwork.org/PDF_files/RedactedCharge.pdf
If you were ashamed of the details getting out, why would you take it public and not keep it within canonical bounds? Just thinking out loud...
Drop the attitude. It was a hypothetical.
No assumption. The contents of the letter were made public in Corapi's complaint. She claimed he had relations with her, her sister, and another woman.
And sometimes those who minister become those who solicit. And, for SOLT to claim directly that that was done here...there must be some evidence.
They say they wanted to dig deeper but the civil lawsuit prevented it but to make that direct accusation in yesterdays statement and say they have proof...
Yeah taking advice from a SOLT and then they throw you under the bus. Great place
He never said that about all of them an to say he did, to even give the idea he did is wrong. The liberal ones are oxygen thieves
I'm in the military and that is a common phrase. If what he is saying is true, that is a pretty valid statement... If he is playing poor souls who want to believe him, then may God have mercy on his soul.
Don't you find that odd? After the investigation had stopped they stated that they, "...had not arrived at any conclusion as to the credibility of the allegations under investigation," and, "... that Fr. Corapi had not been determined guilty of any canonical or civil crimes. If the allegations had been found to be credible, the proper canonical due process would have been offered to Fr. Corapi." Now suddenly, even though they stated the evidence was not found to be credible, they let loose with it anyway. I agree with Michie, I don't know who to trust, the whole thing is sad and scandalous, and I pray for a holy resolution to this mess because the Lord works good from evil.
I would say SOLT is most definitely not credible and no doubt they has pressure from some evil source to throw him under the bus after they defended him
You are missing a lot of things in your assessment. Those things you are so fast to accuse him of he did not do in a vacuum by himself, he had advice from a Bishop, the head of SOLT and canon and regular lawyers
The oxygen thieves thing is not new, he's said that for years. See 2:57.
YouTube - ‪Fr. Corapi and Corruption in the Church‬‏
And again, as far as the civil suit and it's effect on Canon Law, he's following the advice of two very holy men...
It seems someone wishes to demonize me in these forms with their sig line and posts . . . so be it . . . I have a tough skin.
Here is an interesting post by Fr regarding the SOLT statement and
That may be the case, but in Corapi's case there is just too much that is fishy for him to be innocent. His refusal to co operate with the investigation, his living on his own outside of community or church discipline, his payment of $100,000 to keep the woman (and other employees) quiet, his running a for profit enterprise that has brought him great wealth, his refusal to obey his religious superiors and most of all his public renunciation of his priestly ministry---all this is too much.
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?