Fr. Corapi placed on Administrative Leave Following Accusations

[ChadS]

Had this happened ten years ago, I doubt EWTN would make such a move. It is a clear overreation because even if FC did those things, they are sinful, but not illegal. His teachings and writings and videos should not be deemed false if he did commit sinful acts.

However, every charge aimed a Priests today always results in overreation and a wife spread assumption of guilt.

It is just how things are today and Priests have a very, very heavy cross to bear.

How do you know if his actions were or were not illegal? Do you have some special insight to these happenings? The letter, according to Fr. Corapi, is from a former employee. Depending on his connection with this employee there could be grounds for civil lawsuits, even more so if there were threats, intimidation and coercion.

This reaction by his superiors isn’t a reaction of believing he’s guilty. It’s a prudential reacation to extremely serious charges. They need to take the proper steps that are in the best interests for the woman, Fr. Corapi, and also either the diocese or his order (whoever put him on leave). Seldom do all of these mesh together perfectly, but it’s far more preferable than dealing with coverage or other lawsuits if there was some kind of perceived cover-up.

Like others have said all we know about this situation is from Fr. Corapi. I believe he could’ve went on his leave without having said anything more than he would be gone for awhile. Instead he chose to make certain things known and this did nothing but fan fires of speculation. Perhaps he understood this though and knew it would work to his benefit.

ChadS

 

[RosalieM]

Folks,

Let us have clear minds here. There are really two real options here:

1. Father Corapi commited a grave sin, yet he did not commit an illegal act.
2. Father Corapi is being wrongly accused.

In both cases a huge overreaction is taking place. IMO.

I would have agreed with you whole heartedly at first about an overreaction. I felt the same about our parish priest in a similar situation.
But I would venture to guess this sort of reaction may come under intense transparency. Since the Church has been accused of cover-ups in the past, this may now be the procedure of choice. The world is watching.
And since Fr. Corapi has himself announced the unfortunate situation; it occurred to me that he is protecting us and everyone else from the possibility of the sin of detraction. (imho) He himself announced the attempt to harm his good name.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Folks,

Let us have clear minds here. There are really two real options here:

1. Father Corapi commited a grave sin, yet he did not commit an illegal act.
2. Father Corapi is being wrongly accused.

In both cases a huge overreaction is taking place. IMO.

With the information provided there is no way that you can come up with these being the only two options.

 

[irishpatrick]

We don’t know exactly what is being alleged. The woman was an employee so she may be claiming sexual harassment (a crime). Drug addiction could also involve illegal actions. We simply don’t know. Placing someone facing these allegations on leave is SOP for many organizations.

Even if not crimes, the alleged behavior would certainly give scandal. EWTN is wise to distance themselves until things are investigated.

I agree that EWTN should distance themselves for now, yet pulling his materials is nonsense imo because that means they are condemning his work prior to these charges. Even if FC is guilty (which I hope and pray he is not), does that wash away the work he has done? I think not.

 

[irishpatrick]

With the information provided there is no way that you can come up with these being the only two options.

I disagree. If we view what is known, those are the only two options imo. However, if more information is released, then you would be correct that there are many other options. However, assuming FC is innocent until proven guilty, and assuming the information given is the full extent, then I feel those two options are sound.

I will NOT speculate as to what other information might be released because frankly I feel that would be most uncharitable to “guess” in a situation like this.

IMO, right now it appears a grave overreation is taking place.

 

[irishpatrick]

I would have agreed with you whole heartedly at first about an overreaction. I felt the same about our parish priest in a similar situation.
But I would venture to guess this sort of reaction may come under intense transparency. Since the Church has been accused of cover-ups in the past, this may now be the procedure of choice. The world is watching.
And since Fr. Corapi has himself announced the unfortunate situation; it occurred to me that he is protecting us and everyone else from the possibility of the sin of detraction. (imho) He himself announced the attempt to harm his good name.

I agree, and I think you put it quite well. I do think yanking his materials and pulling him pre-recorded spots on the radio is an overreation. I would agree that he should do any public speaking or enter any public ministry until this is resolved…but if yanking his stuff is deemed appropriate, then that is a form of saying all his work is not condemned–and that imo is an overreaction.

FC’s work was either accurate and true to the faith, or it was not. Even if he is guilty that still remains accurate.

 

[Havard]

I agree that EWTN should distance themselves for now, yet pulling his materials is nonsense imo because that means they are condemning his work prior to these charges. Even if FC is guilty (which I hope and pray he is not), does that wash away the work he has done? I think not.

So in a nutshell, you prefer to assume they’re wrongfully persecuting him, even though you have no real proof that it’s their motivation? Suit yourself. I don’t see that at all though, and I think EWTN deserves more credit than that.

 

[TMC]

I disagree. If we view what is known, those are the only two options imo. However, if more information is released, then you would be correct that there are many other options. However, assuming FC is innocent until proven guilty, and assuming the information given is the full extent, then I feel those two options are sound.

I will NOT speculate as to what other information might be released because frankly I feel that would be most uncharitable to “guess” in a situation like this.

IMO, right now it appears a grave overreation is taking place.

It is equally uncharitable to guess that those required to take action in response to the allegations are overreacting. We can’t know one way or the other at this point. One thing we do know is that those who are responsible for handling the allegations know more about them then we do.

 

[irishpatrick]

So in a nutshell, you prefer to assume they’re wrongfully persecuting him, even though you have no real proof that it’s their motivation? Suit yourself. I don’t see that at all though, and I think EWTN deserves more credit than that.

No, not that at all. I simply think there is a grave overreaction happening. I am not thinking ill of anyone.

 

[irishpatrick]

It is equally uncharitable to guess that those required to take action in response to the allegations are overreacting. We can’t know one way or the other at this point. One thing we do know is that those who are responsible for handling the allegations know more about them then we do.

I agree, to a point. Placing FC on leave and removing him from contact with the public would seem to be an appropriate action. However, taking all his materials off the web and yanking his older recorded shows from the radio is an overreaction imo. I agree fully that with charges like this there must be a careful response, and removing FC from the public makes sense.

It smacks of an early judgement of guilt when everything a man/Priest has done is removed from the public access.

 

[RosalieM]

Another thing to consider is that there are probably a lot of strictly confidential legal communications going on that we are not privy to. It can get very complicated and I daresay
EWTN has to protect themselves.
We wouldn’t want to see possible harm come to Mother Angelica’s creation; nor would Fr. Corapi.

 

[irishpatrick]

Another thing to consider is that there are probably a lot of strictly confidential legal communications going on that we are not privy to. It can get very complicated and I daresay
EWTN has to protect themselves.
We wouldn’t want to see possible harm come to Mother Angelica’s creation; nor would Fr. Corapi.

Quite true.

 

[Chrismacmax]

How do we know Fr Corapi is innocent? perhaps he DID relapse into drug use and did the things accused of. It wouldn’t be the first time a drug addict returned to his / her vice.

That is why there needs to be an investigation.

 

[RosalieM]

We must think the best of Fr. Corapi.

 

[ac_claire]

I agree, to a point. Placing FC on leave and removing him from contact with the public would seem to be an appropriate action. However, taking all his materials off the web and yanking his older recorded shows from the radio is an overreaction imo. I agree fully that with charges like this there must be a careful response, and removing FC from the public makes sense.

It smacks of an early judgement of guilt when everything a man/Priest has done is removed from the public access.

I see what you mean, but at the same time I think that EWTN’s statement seemed very fair and appropriate. I can see how pulling all of his shows might be an over-reaction BUT we’re living in a time right now where the Church is still stinging from the big scandal (or, non-issue, depending on your POV) about the Holy Father and the Church sheltering priests accused of abuse, both in the past and currently, etc. It seems to me that Fr. Corapi was intimating that, because of the recent scandals, there’s a knee-jerk reaction to go overboard now in the other direction. Guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around. I think that’s what’s going on.

 

[irishpatrick]

I see what you mean, but at the same time I think that EWTN’s statement seemed very fair and appropriate. I can see how pulling all of his shows might be an over-reaction BUT we’re living in a time right now where the Church is still stinging from the big scandal (or, non-issue, depending on your POV) about the Holy Father and the Church sheltering priests accused of abuse, both in the past and currently, etc. It seems to me that Fr. Corapi was intimating that, because of the recent scandals, there’s a knee-jerk reaction to go overboard now in the other direction. Guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around. I think that’s what’s going on.

I am just going to exit this thread now. Thanks much to all.

I pray Father Corapi is innocent. I pray for the others involved no matter whether Father Corapi is innocent or guilty.

 

[ac_claire]

I agree. Yet, should the Church engage in this brutally unfair practice? People, including Priests, deserve a presumption of innocence even in the midst of a harm time for the faith and the Church.

I personally think no. And I feel for Fr. Corapi. But it’s not me making the decisions, and I don’t know all the considerations that Fr. Corapi’s superiors and the powers that be in the Catholic media have to… consider. I do wish it could be innocent until proven guilty, though.

 

[RosalieM]

I agree. Yet, should the Church engage in this brutally unfair practice? People, including Priests, deserve a presumption of innocence even in the midst of a harm time for the faith and the Church.

I’m thinking (guessing) the Church must have its own approach to accused priests now. I don’t think it’s fair either; but it might very well be necessary in an unforgiving secular society.

 

[dfp42]

Does anyone here know exactly how long something like this could take? Are we talking over a year or more to investigate this?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I disagree. If we view what is known, those are the only two options imo. However, if more information is released, then you would be correct that there are many other options. However, assuming FC is innocent until proven guilty, and assuming the information given is the full extent, then I feel those two options are sound.

I will NOT speculate as to what other information might be released because frankly I feel that would be most uncharitable to “guess” in a situation like this.

IMO, right now it appears a grave overreation is taking place.

By “viewing what we know” I can not come to the conclusion you do.