Corapi accuser promised to ‘destroy’ priest after being fired: claim

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pork_Roll
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pork_Roll said:
It really doesn’t make a difference to me. It’s their decision to apply a policy which I think is unjust and does great harm to priests.
Click to expand...
And for every one who acted the way you have, there are probably five who would withdraw their support if they had not had such a policy and had KEPT airing the teaching of a priest suspended from faculties. Because that would smack of rebellion and scandal, would it not? They had no choice.
 
And for every one who acted the way you have, there are probably five who would withdraw their support if they had not had such a policy and had KEPT airing the teaching of a priest suspended from faculties. Because that would smack of rebellion and scandal, would it not? They had no choice.
Click to expand...
I hope EWTN doesnt base its decisions on what makes money rather than what is good, just and true. EWTN even admitted they struggled with this decision. They were free to do as they choose in this matter. They chose poorly and may have done irreparable damage to Fr. Corapi’s character. They should have chose the high road and not have furthered this unjust decision of guilty until proven innocent.
 
Pork_Roll said:
I hope EWTN doesnt base its decisions on what makes money rather than what is good, just and true. EWTN even admitted they struggled with this decision. They were free to do as they choose in this matter. They chose poorly and may have done irreparable damage to Fr. Corapi’s character. They should have chose the high road and not have furthered this unjust decision of guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...
You don’t then deny that to act in discord with the decision of the Bishop would taint them with a spirit of disobedience? They did choose the high road: they chose to do the unpopular thing (indeed, Fr. C. is very popular), potentially alienate viewers and much-needed donors like yourself, and follow what is a good policy: not to air a suspended priest, REGARDLESS of the reason for his suspension.

And I’m certain that when Fr. C’s name is cleared - as I believe it will be - they will be the loudest voice heralding the good news and welcoming him back. I hope those who have arbitrarily and rashly withdrawn support will then resume their contributions. In the meantime, I hope others give more to make up for the difference.
 
I found it troubling that he can’t function as a priest, was relieved of his duties, even Fr. Francis Stone was a priest, just put on leave. EWTN cleared out his tapes/dvds also, but this seems very serious.

“…Fr. Corapi has been placed on administrative leave and has had all of his priestly faculties removed.”

Read more: ewtn.com/#ixzz1HoIX02Qz
I hope he is innocent but I wont make any remarks one way or another…I’ve been shocked by others and wont hold someone higher than any other human being.

Was it just one accusation? This seems awfully rash.The drug abuse, if true is a personal matter, but what funds would he have used? The other things not so much.
He was a great preacher, but did admit, if my memory is good, that he exagerated some things, his stories would change from show to show, but he was trying to get a point across. Now people are digging more deeply, he wasn’t a green beret, etc. but I think if he did lie, it was again, to get a point across like a parable. It’s just with so much lieing in the church, you can’t do that anymore.

What scares me is that anyone can do that, write a letter, write dozens about priests, shut down the church’s, there has to be something else, with children, I can understand it but not adults.
 
debraran said:
He was a great preacher, but did admit, if my memory is good, that he exagerated some things, his stories would change from show to show, but he was trying to get a point across. Now people are digging more deeply, he wasn’t a green beret, etc. but I think if he did lie, it was again, to get a point across like a parable. It’s just with so much lieing in the church, you can’t do that anymore.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge, there is nothing autobiographical in his talks which he has “changed from show to show.” This kind of insinuation really tarnishes a man’s word, i.m.o. There are selected talks in which, while reviewing an incident, he will add a detail not present in the others, but that is the only variation I have ever heard. And virtually all of the autobiographical stuff I have heard 3-4 times (because of the recycling of his talks on the radio especially). I heard this recently in one talk, wherein he added a very interesting detail of the oft-repeated story, that I had not heard in the previous, which merely provided an extra minor dimension and did not in any way compromise the details or contradict his previous accounts; in fact, if anything, the detail shed slightly more realistic (as opposed to fantastical) information about the incident.

I would not characterize his stories as “exaggerating” the truth (the facts). I would characterize them as providing color, like any good storyteller does. He generalizes, both for the sake of the narrative, and also frankly to protect identities. He does this when speaking sometimes of incidents in his priesthood, and very much so with respect to his life in Hollywood. He has named at least five quite famous entertainers, four of whom are still alive, and I’m actually surprised that their agents or publicists have not reigned him in on that, unless these incidents are already public knowledge which those stars have admitted to in other media (such as biographies or interviews). But I hardly think that they were false, because he could have been sued, if so, and all those tapes pulled. (And years after he produced those tapes, they are still running.)

I have not heard him specifically say that he was a Green Beret. I have heard him talk about special military assignments, missions, etc., which is quite believable. I’ve also heard him often say things like, “It wasn’t this particular [unit, mission, etc.] but if you know anything about [The Green Berets, The S.EA.L.S, the Special Forces, etc.], then you know it was comparable to being a member of [one of those].” All of the armed forces have a variety of special groups – and specialized temporary missions.
 
I don’t remember it exactly, but I thought he mentioned his stories on one occasion and some Catholc blogs took him to task about some things he said about his past. I don’t really care, the truth or non-turth is on him, but with the Internet age and things looked up much more easily, you have to be careful. Whether he served or not, those things get analyzed with politicians but in our world now, priests come under scrutiny also. There have been so many lies, so many cover-ups, TV priests that many followed, under attack, some left, you have to careful. No one can be perfect, but when you are on TV, they will look closely at you. Other priests on EWTN haven’t been talked about lately and I hope they never are, but you can never be too careful.

If and it’s a big IF, some things are true, you have to pray for all involved and again, nothing demonizes the man, he is a man, but honesty is what everyone wants on BOTH sides. I say, if the accuser lied, he should be prosecuted.
 
Teelynn said:
In thinking about why a Bishop decides to put a priest on suspension in such a case, I would wonder if it wasn’t for his protection as well? What might someone use further against him? Just wondering.
Click to expand...
This is Father Corapi’s lent. I believe God will bring good out of this situation.
 
I hope so…Father was always honest about many things. He was honest when the priest crisis hit how he didn’t want to be a priest anymore, he loved the love he initially got, the letters, praise, then it was accusations, people holding their children to them as he passed, spitting. I watched that show a few times and thought he was the most honest I had heard in a long time. It’s easier being a priest when loved, not when scorned. But he stayed and persevered.

His ego though was always there, he was humbled by his addictions, but still loved praise. He talked of how he “connected” once with a woman in the audience, he felt she liked him and he was attracted to her, but his chidlren, his marriage was with God. How many priests would just admit feelings like that in public? That’s why I liked him…he was brash, but honest.
If this is true, he will say something at some point, and if it’s not, he will also, that you can count on!
 
debraran said:
I hope so…Father was always honest about many things. He was honest when the priest crisis hit how he didn’t want to be a priest anymore, he loved the love he initially got, the letters, praise, then it was accusations, people holding their children to them as he passed, spitting. I watched that show a few times and thought he was the most honest I had heard in a long time. It’s easier being a priest when loved, not when scorned. But he stayed and persevered.

His ego though was always there, he was humbled by his addictions, but still loved praise. He talked of how he “connected” once with a woman in the audience, he felt she liked him and he was attracted to her, but his chidlren, his marriage was with God. How many priests would just admit feelings like that in public? That’s why I liked him…he was brash, but honest.
If this is true, he will say something at some point, and if it’s not, he will also, that you can count on!
Click to expand...
You have picked up the same trait that I have in watching him…telling it like it is! That’s why I find this whole thing hard to believe. I would have thought Fr. would have owned up to something from the beginning if this were all true…he doesn’t seem to be someone who would out and out lie about something like this…not really his personality…he has always appeared to be brash, bold, and honest.
 
Pork_Roll said:
I hope EWTN doesnt base its decisions on what makes money rather than what is good, just and true. EWTN even admitted they struggled with this decision. They were free to do as they choose in this matter. They chose poorly and may have done irreparable damage to Fr. Corapi’s character. They should have chose the high road and not have furthered this unjust decision of guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...
You must understand that EWTN’s decision is not based on presumed guilt but on an already known fact that Fr. Corarpi is on suspension and has no faculties. It is only proper for a Catholic network to not air anything from a priest who has no faculties. I fully support their decision because it shows that EWTN is first and foremost, loyal to the Church before Father Corapi. And I am certain that based on what I’ve seen of Fr. Corapi, he fully supports EWTN’s decision regarding him. Unless any of us here are canon lawyers, we are in no position to judge whether the administrative suspension and removal of faculties was just or unjust. Therefore we must always presume that it is for the best.

Can you imagine what would happen and the kind of precedent set if EWTN were to disregard the suspension?

If anything, EWTN needs even MORE support now.
 
I agree, they have to do that. If they removed his DVD’s etc. that seems extreme, but again, following the rules. When Fr. Francis left, they knew more than most did and banished everything. I was dismayed becuase I had thought of buying a DVD with college students from my hometown, but everything after Jeff Cavins shows were gone.
I understand it more now, but I was pretty angry then.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
To my knowledge, there is nothing autobiographical in his talks which he has “changed from show to show.” This kind of insinuation really tarnishes a man’s word, i.m.o. There are selected talks in which, while reviewing an incident, he will add a detail not present in the others, but that is the only variation I have ever heard. And virtually all of the autobiographical stuff I have heard 3-4 times (because of the recycling of his talks on the radio especially). I heard this recently in one talk, wherein he added a very interesting detail of the oft-repeated story, that I had not heard in the previous, which merely provided an extra minor dimension and did not in any way compromise the details or contradict his previous accounts; in fact, if anything, the detail shed slightly more realistic (as opposed to fantastical) information about the incident.

I would not characterize his stories as “exaggerating” the truth (the facts). I would characterize them as providing color, like any good storyteller does. He generalizes, both for the sake of the narrative, and also frankly to protect identities. He does this when speaking sometimes of incidents in his priesthood, and very much so with respect to his life in Hollywood. He has named at least five quite famous entertainers, four of whom are still alive, and I’m actually surprised that their agents or publicists have not reigned him in on that, unless these incidents are already public knowledge which those stars have admitted to in other media (such as biographies or interviews). But I hardly think that they were false, because he could have been sued, if so, and all those tapes pulled. (And years after he produced those tapes, they are still running.)

I have not heard him specifically say that he was a Green Beret. I have heard him talk about special military assignments, missions, etc., which is quite believable. I’ve also heard him often say things like, “It wasn’t this particular [unit, mission, etc.] but if you know anything about [The Green Berets, The S.EA.L.S, the Special Forces, etc.], then you know it was comparable to being a member of [one of those].” All of the armed forces have a variety of special groups – and specialized temporary missions.
Click to expand...
Very well stated. 👍
 
The devil, finally thinks it got Fr. Corapi.

Far from it, Fr. Corapi was ordained for a mission by the Blessed Mother, whom Fr. loves so much. Through his preaching, many souls have re-directed their path and found God and the Church.

Redemptive suffering for Fr. Corapi -what an honor to suffer and “offer it up” to Jesus for all the sinners of the whole world, beginning with his enemies who waited patiently to attack him precisely on “Ash Wednesday,” it is not a coincidence.

Rosaries, Novenas, Holy Eucharists are not enough to offer to God for Fr. Corapi.
I want Fr. Corapi back to EWTN.🍿

For the sake of His sorrowful passion. Have mercy on us and on all of the whole world.
 
Pork_Roll said:
When Fr. Corapi is exonerated, I will continue my financial support of EWTN. What I’m protesting is this unjust practice of presumed guilt until proven otherwise. He should be taken off the air when he is proven guilty and not presumed guilty just in case.
Click to expand...
I feel sometimes like you, believe me. It is satan that is behind this, its job is to create discord among the children of God. At this time, let’s unite our prayers to Almighty God in a search for the truth. I love Fr. Corapi because with his bold preaching “in season and our of season,” as he says, I re-directed my path to Jesus and His Church.

Fr. Corapi says, the devil delights in attacking our priests because it knows the only person can celebrate the Holy Eucharist is a priest -no priest, no Eucharist- I’ll never forget that.

Let’s pray for Fr. Corapi so that he can come back to all of us.
It is our time to continue his teachings, let’s put Fr. Corapi in the “Immaculate Heart of Mary” and let her take care of everything else.

Remember, “when Mary talks, God listens!” That’s right!
Blessings.🙂
 
“What I’m protesting is this unjust practice of presumed guilt until proven otherwise. He should be taken off the air when he is proven guilty and not presumed guilty just in case.”

Actually, YOU are doing the presuming here: you are presuming that EWTN believes Father Corapi is guilty, and there is no evidence of that. EWTN is, as they have stated, following a policy they have had in place for thirty years. That’s why organizations have policies; so they don’t have to make critical decisions flying by the seat of their pants.

Here’s how it works. Father’s faculties (including his faculty to preach) have been removed pending the outcome of an investigation. If EWTN runs his shows, *in which he preaches, *they are in a very real sense allowing him to practice his faculties in disobedience to this directive. That the shows are taped and not live is beside the point. His preaching is being heard during a time when it is not supposed to be.

Many people – law enforcement officers, attorneys, educators, health professionals, and others – are placed on administrative leave when they are the target of serious allegations of misconduct. They, too, have their “faculties” to practice removed during this period. Reasonable people understand that this is not the same as being declared guilty.

The problem here is not that EWTN is being unreasonable; it is that many of Father Corapi’s FANS are being unreasonable.
 
Actually, YOU are doing the presuming here: you are presuming that EWTN believes Father Corapi is guilty, and there is no evidence of that.
Click to expand...
No evidence other than allowing a single women’s accusation to remove him from the air–Guilty to proven innocent. All the excuses in the world do not change this fact.
 
one thing to keep in mind is that if the accusations are really just about drug abuse and affairs with adult women, it is very possible that any discipline would take place privately, and the public will never know one way or the other what really happened. everyone will be free to go on speculating themselves into fits of righteous indignation til doomsday.
 
Raymond Arroyo said multiple women last night which puts a little more spin to it. I know when some are put on administrative leave where my husband works, they still work, but not with the public, they are still policemen, but not on the street. I feel when you say, “he’s not a priest” which really isn’t accurate, but the same as he can’t act as one, a bit severe. Even privately he can’t do mass?? Even Fr. Francis said he had all his faculties.
And since when does having an affair ban you from being a priest…that has never been handled in this way before. Children I can understand, possible consenting adults, no. Wrong is wrong, if it is true, but this is beyond the norm. Drug abuse is a personal thing, many addicts, especially under stress, go back years later, but again, that’s a medical/personal thing to be taken care of out of the public eye.

I do understand EWTN having a policy they can stand by…I don’t blame them, and I trust as with past priests, they know what they are doing. On the slightest chance they charges are correct, it is scandelous to them.I hope this Easter brings good news and the devil isn’t happy…you must caution though blaming the devil always, we have free will and although he tempts, despair is his friend, Fr.Corapi, more than anyone knew that. We are all human.
 
Pork_Roll said:
That’s a weak legalistic argument which is trying to distance EWTN from their implicit support for Fr. Corapi’s presumed guilt.
Click to expand...
And what of the guilt that you presume on the part of EWTN? Twice you have said they presume him guilty, when nothing of the kind has been said, nor is it reasonable to thing a simple suspension of programing indicates a presumption of guilty. Rather it seems to me that it is you who are jumping to conclusions and imputing guilt where there is no guilt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top