Fr. Corapi Responds to Some of His Order's Charges

[CreedalCatholic]

Originally Posted by CreedalCatholic
Take the supposition of Father Corapi’s case. Suppose he is really innocent (thus far there has been the supposition of guilt without a verdict; unless I’m mistaken a verdict or something of the nature has been reached.)

When he is found to be innocent (a supposition and not my own belief), what are going to be the consequences? Will Father return to the Church, and as a result, return to the priesthood? But even leaving this question aside and unanswered, does anyone realize how greater the consequence is of him being found innocent than being guilty? Here you have a man who has been betokened the Sacred deposit faith and endowed with the Sacrament of Holy Orders upon his soul. Here you will have a man, if he is innocent, who will have had his soul and all he believed compromised by an unjust (and pretty bantering) action. Looking back, you can see a man, if he a turns out innocent, who was driven and pushed away from the priesthood (and quite as much as the Church.)

Father C is responsible for the actions and decisions of Father C. No one else can take responsibility for “driving him” anywhere. He has chosen to act in disobedience to his lawful canonical Superior. That is not acceptable. It is not OK. If it should be determined that Father was unjustly accused, then he will share that experience with Our Lord Himself. To offer any pretense that Father C is “free” to disobey his lawful Superiors is flawed logic. They have not ordered him “to sin” - the only path that would allow him to be disobedient.

What motive facinates and drives anyone to push another person so far from the Church (and consequently from the faith)? Wouldn’t this be worst than a heresy since a heresy generally draws the soul away from the Truth of Salvation rather than pushing one’s soul away from Salvation? Be careful of judging someone’s guilt ("which of you has not sinned, cast the first stone - Jesus Christ spoke when a woman ran away from the men trying to stone her.)

That woman did NOT run away. On the contrary she was being held captive. It was the words of Our Lord that, in the end, set her free.

from JOHN : 2-11

2 But early in the morning he arrived again in the temple area, and all the people started coming to him, and he sat down and taught them.
3 Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle.
4 They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery.
5 Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?”
6 They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger.
7 But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
8 Again he bent down and wrote on the ground.
9 And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left alone with the woman before him.
10 Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more.”

Certainly Father is responsible for making a choice. But, what I dispute is the voluntary manner of many people placing the entire matter upon him as though it were all of Father’s choice. Which begs several questions, who pursued to send a list of accusations, with explicit details, across multiple channels of media? Who took upon Canon Law and what processes underly to bring about administrative leave (along with pressing Father to accept or be disobedient)? What purpose would it be for any person (with or without authority) to take an already questionable, compromised, and terrible situation with presenting information making a direct attack another man’s character? Whether someone has committed a grave and mortal sin or sins (not merely misconducts), does not allow nor give license to someone to blast out a bunch of cruel and terribly mean things against one’s character (whether the other person has done this as well or not.) Quite contrary to what people think, Canon Law is being abused and does not allow for taking down someone’s character (no matter what Charter people want to find subjective reasons to explain why Father doesn’t get a much more just treatment.) Because, the actions taken have brought about people who already hate the Church and those who already hated Father. So, each person is ready to or already cast the first stone.

Yes, the woman had commited some terrible and outrageous sins (not misconducts and actions unbecoming - language of Scribes and Pharisee’s.) However, she had turned to Christ for her life (not the pharisee’s and stoners.) Her repentance was from Christ and not from man. Her turning to Him is not definitively put in the Gospel as though she was caught in the immediate activity of adultery (which begs the question, where’s the man whom she committed adultery?) She may have committed adultery awhile ago and you have Scribes and Pharisee’s who were keeping tabs and “just caught her” (and apparently the man whom she had committed the action with. Which begs another question: did he turn her over to the Pharisee’s to get off or get some advantage as Judas the Iscariot had gotten for turning Christ in? Christ was held captive and presented to Pontius Pilate.) The man, the pharisee’s, and the scribes take her encounter with a man to test and use for accusing Christ.)

 

[guanophore]

I’m more in accord with this comment than most of the others here. I think Fr, Corapi wants to continue the work he has been doing. He can’t do that silently, especially since he has been officially silenced by his order. I speak of him as Fr. Corapi, because he says he is a priest forever. He is not leaving the Church, but he will be ineffectual if he just “lies down and dies.” I wish him success and happiness in his new venture. This situation somehow reminds me of when high church officials tried to silence Mother Angelica. God, Himself, showed His favor to her when He healed her at that time of her decades long crippling health problems. Maybe God will do something for Fr. Corapi to show where His feelings lie in this matter. God bless him.

I thought this at first too. In the light of all the evidence that has come out, though, I think otherwise now. I think this idea of “lie down and die” is exactly what Christ is calling all of us to do. For him, it means withdrawing from public ministry, either temporarily, or permanently. God does not want us to preach about a life of holiness we are not ready, willing, or able to live.

When any of the saints have been silenced by authorities over them, God, in His time, released them to do His work. In submitting to obedience, even when it was for selfish motives of the authorities, the saints have glorified God, not themselves.

I think God has acted very specifically thorugh Corapi’s superiors, to indicate where He is leading him right now. He wants him divested, non litigious, obedient and most of all, SILENT. God’s call for him is clearly visible in the communication from SOLT.

 

[guanophore]

Priest Corapi has talked many times about the continuous pressure, miles flown and the travails of himself and other priests. Priest Corapi is human as we all are, including all priests and The Priest.

Let’s suppose, through some Deception by The Liar, the public ministry for Priest Corapi led or was leading him to mortal sin. Would it be better for him to cast the public ministry away?

What are you saying?

I think it is clear that public ministry was draining him. He clearly needed a break. The way he chose to take the “break” was not necessary. He could have obeyed his superior, and withdraw from public ministry into quiet reflection. Since he refused this calling, The Liar is having a field day.

 

[catharina]

…

Because, the actions taken have brought about people who already hate the Church and those who already hated Father. So, each person is ready to or already cast the first stone.

With this statement from you, I can’t imagine
how you think anyone could find your words credible.
You have based this statement on what?
On its own merits, the statement is beyond the pale.
IMO.

 

[catharina]

With this statement from you, I can’t imagine
how you think anyone could find your words credible.
You have based this statement on what?
On its own merits, the statement is beyond the pale.
IMO.

A PS to this above post of mine:
why imagine that hateful people seek a reason to hate?
Hateful people hate. They need no special reason for hating.

 

[cecelia81]

As big a sinner as I am, I have no business criticizing Father Corapi or
any other priest.
I will make the observation that I always liked him and found him
very orthodox, if a bit bombastic (seemingly) at times in his talks.
I am deeply sad that this whole thing has occured.
I truly hope he returns to his order and regains his spiritual strength.

As for that shaved head and black beard, I wish he would
go back to his natural look. This new
look reminds me of a photo of the late Anton Szandor LaVey.
The wrong look, certainly, for a Catholic man of God.

And as one who is going through a hellish spiritual time myself,
let me say to everyone (from a painful personal perspective),
“DON’T Sin. WHATEVER else you do, JUST DON’T Sin.”
God bless all of you.

I absolutely agree that he’s looking like Anton LaVey. It’s bone chilling- and ANYONE who is close to God should know what this “look” is- because those close to the other side certainly do. This is a man in desperate need of our prayers.

 

[Arkadin]

I absolutely agree that he’s looking like Anton LaVey. It’s bone chilling- and ANYONE who is close to God should know what this “look” is- because those close to the other side certainly do. This is a man in desperate need of our prayers.

Because no one looked like this before Anton LaVey.

 

[gr1]

i was to lazy to read the whole thread so forgive me if what i say has already been stated.did Padre Pio act this way? did Jesus act this way?where is the humility,the willingness to submit to his superiors?dont get me wrong i love Carope.personaly i think he’s lost his way.that said though, i am confident he will come to his senses and he will be the better man for it.its for that end that our Lord will let the devil have his way for a while. in the mean time i will pray for him along with many others to whom he will allways be a priest.

 

[J_Katherine]

Certainly Father is responsible for making a choice. But, what I dispute is the voluntary manner of many people placing the entire matter upon him as though it were all of Father’s choice. Which begs several questions, who pursued to send a list of accusations, with explicit details, across multiple channels of media? Who took upon Canon Law and what processes underly to bring about administrative leave (along with pressing Father to accept or be disobedient)? What purpose would it be for any person (with or without authority) to take an already questionable, compromised, and terrible situation with presenting information making a direct attack another man’s character? Whether someone has committed a grave and mortal sin or sins (not merely misconducts), does not allow nor give license to someone to blast out a bunch of cruel and terribly mean things against one’s character (whether the other person has done this as well or not.) Quite contrary to what people think, Canon Law is being abused and does not allow for taking down someone’s character (no matter what Charter people want to find subjective reasons to explain why Father doesn’t get a much more just treatment.) Because, the actions taken have brought about people who already hate the Church and those who already hated Father. So, each person is ready to or already cast the first stone.

Who sent a list of accusations across multiple channels of media? John Corapi. In response to his impeding the investigation of those accusations and his refusal to cooperate with the suggestions, and subsequently the orders, of his legitimate superiors, they published the findings they were able to ascertain, which were serious enough to warn the faithful, in charity and due diligence, that John Corapi is not a fit minister to follow.

I am not sure what you are asking about when it comes to canon law or “Charters,” but who placed Fr Corapi on administrative leave for the duration of the investigation? His legitimate superiors, in full accord with canonical due process. He was not suspended a divinis, as implied in Bishop Gracida’s blog posts, which in any case were old posts intended to reference cases of priests charged with abuse of a minor, which no one ever claimed this was.

You wonder whether the commission of grave sin or even misconduct justifies making negative comments about someone’s character. The answer is yes, if the misconduct has been found to have been committed by a person in a position to influence others–such as a priest with a large following who has been demonstrated to have engaged in behavior inconsistent with his vocation. In fact, those circumstances require that the faithful be informed so as to use their prudent judgment. This is one of the few exceptions to the general condemnation of detraction, which does prohibit us, under pain of sin, to publicize the faults of another unless there is very good reason. On the other side, I would ask what good reason has been served by John Corapi’s public attacks on the woman he calls his accuser, and those even worse attacks perpetrated by his followers which he has chosen to ignore.

Trust me, canon law is not being abused in this case–by the S.O.L.T. or Bishop Mulvey. Please read the posts by others more expert than you or I. I apologize for taking up this much room to repeat again the same defenses to the same circular arguments. I hope this can be the last time.

 

[guanophore]

Please read the posts by others more expert than you or I. I apologize for taking up this much room to repeat again the same defenses to the same circular arguments. I hope this can be the last time.

I think it will be necessary as long as people are not doing their research. Maybe we can just note this post number?

 

[cecelia81]

Because no one looked like this before Anton LaVey.

You’re missing the point. If this was about all the others in history that “look” like that, then you’re right- there’s no issue. However, that look has become an ICONIC look because of LaVey. A Catholic priest should know this. Corapi has clearly shaven his head clean and died his goatee & eyebrows black for a reason- a vain reason. And also to make a statement. Of course we can’t delve into his head and KNOW what the reason is for certain, but the blatant similarity is not something only myself or the other commenter have noticed. If you even google images of Corapi, pictures of LaVey are popping up. The mere fact that people are making that connection is very unsettling. And considering he’s seeming to be acting more in a way that LaVey would approve of than the Pope, there’s even more cause for concern.

As I said- This man needs our prayers- whether you care what he looks like or who he looks like or not.

 

[Waiting]

Mother Angelica had the Pope on her side also…and he sent her a gift. That show out of respect for the bishop isn’t shown as a rerun. She was allowed to have the mass the way she wanted it (as they do in Rome) but not on TV.

Mother lived and breathed Jesus and would never, ever, leave him or not repent of her sins. She isn’t a saint, (although being purified now it seems) and I can’t imagine a comparison. Read HER bio for a good read, I have no desire to read John Corapi’s. I can’t even imagine what else but his conversion story he can put in it.

I was not saying that there were similarities between the situations of Mother Angelica and Fr. Corapi, just that both forced faced opposition because of their behavior. Mother rode out the storm, and I’m praying that Fr. Corapi is blessed, also.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

You’re missing the point. If this was about all the others in history that “look” like that, then you’re right- there’s no issue. However, that look has become an ICONIC look because of LaVey. A Catholic priest should know this. Corapi has clearly shaven his head clean and died his goatee & eyebrows black for a reason- a vain reason. And also to make a statement. Of course we can’t delve into his head and KNOW what the reason is for certain, but the blatant similarity is not something only myself or the other commenter have noticed. If you even google images of Corapi, pictures of LaVey are popping up. The mere fact that people are making that connection is very unsettling. And considering he’s seeming to be acting more in a way that LaVey would approve of than the Pope, there’s even more cause for concern.

As I said- This man needs our prayers- whether you care what he looks like or who he looks like or not.

These things are very troublesome. At his age, he should know better. The decisions he is making do remind one very much of the type of decisions made by people in the grip of alcoholism/addiction.

It’s a weak analogy, but if I suddenly started dressing like Lady GaGa, I would be sending a message with my appearance. For whatever reason, if I decided that look was what I was going for, people would make some assumptions about me. The Black Sheepdog image seems to include this shaved-head, black-dyed beard and eyebrows look. As a matter of fact, his Fu Manchu facial hair does somewhat resemble the “beard” of a Collie or a Schnauzer. Maybe he is unintentionally or intentionally trying for that look, and coming out looking more like Anton LaVey. Or maybe that’s the look he really is going for. All I know is that the transformation is NOT random.

Would you EVER have guessed that this man would look like he does today? Look at how clear and calm his eyes are…there is peace in his face. No longer. So sad.

Corapi

 

[Arkadin]

I wonder how many people really know who Anton LaVey is.

I think it’s silly his name has come up in this discussion. Reminds me of this scene from this movie. There are some “rough” words, so if you are easily offended, don’t watch it.

 

[kristleful]

Respectfully, I would encourage you if possible to read through all of the threads associated with this topic, although they are many. People ARE praying for Fr. Corapi. I do not know that a dedicated thread, etc., has been started to that end, but nearly everyone who has posted to date has mentioned that they have been and are continuing to pray for him. Beyond that, I am not sure how we can help a man who apparently sees nothing awry in what he is doing and therefore doesn’t see himself as in need of assistance. And that is the crux of this biscuit - he initiated the break from his Order, not the other way around, he is the one who wants to enter this “new era” as he has called it. His Order and the Bishop just want him to return home.

I have read all of the posts in this thread and have been following the other threads as well, so I know that many of us are praying. I started the rosary thread for Fr. Corapi in the hope that many of us could come together and join our prayers together, as God loves it when we pray as one. I also thought a rosary together would be very fitting, because Fr. Corapi spent a great deal of time preaching about the power of the rosary against satan. I am very optimistic that God will turn this around and rescue Fr. Corapi from whatever evil forces may be behind this behavior. I do not believe there is anyone beyond being helped. I also believe that Fr. Corapi, as do all of us sinners, needs a little more love and compassion, and a little less condemnation. This is indeed a very grave matter, because there are a great many people following his every move, and he will be held accountable if he leads any of these people away from the Church and obedience. However, he still deserves our love and compassion, as he is our brother in Christ, and, as he will always have the indelible mark of the priesthood on his soul, he still deserves our respect as a priest. Therefore, if we find it necessary for the sake of others to talk about Fr. Corapi’s actions and accusations, then we must do so with the utmost charity, while being as respectful as we can.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if everyone who is on this thread would join together on the rosary thread and pray as one for Fr. Corapi? What a powerful prayer that would be, and a powerful message that we are not here to condemn him, but to love and pray for a fellow sinner.

Here is the link again, for those who have not seen it:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=579813

I hope to see you there!

 

[scoobydoo6v92]

I wonder how many people really know who Anton LaVey is.

I think it’s silly his name has come up in this discussion. Reminds me of this scene from this movie. There are some “rough” words, so if you are easily offended, don’t watch it.

I know who he is Started the church of satan wierd dude to say the least

 

[Robertanthony]

Because no one looked like this before Anton LaVey.

The same can be said about the name “Adolph”. Naming a baby Adolph in 2011 ain’t quite the same as doing it in 1911, no?

 

[brb3]

I am having the exact same thoughts. The evidence is compelling.

What ‘evidence’ do we know for fact ?

I agree ex-priest JC’s most recent video explanation is lame-o, but I do see valid points in his audio explanation for why he resigned w/o legal defense [that the Church investigation could well be unfair to him … and drag on forever].

This ‘Black Sheepdog’ moniker is ridiculous … and seems quite infantile of him. Almost as if he invisions himself as the new-age internet star to the secular world, functioning apart from the Church.

But, what bothers me the most is the apparent lack of facts on this controversy. I would like to see ‘evidence’ to convict or exculpate him. But, its probably a ‘she said – he said’ matter at best, w/o hard evidence that we could make judgments about.

 

[scoobydoo6v92]

What ‘evidence’ do we know for fact ?

I agree ex-priest JC’s most recent video explanation is lame-o, but I do see valid points in his audio explanation for why he resigned w/o legal defense [that the Church investigation could well be unfair to him … and drag on forever].

This ‘Black Sheepdog’ moniker is ridiculous … and seems quite infantile of him. Almost as if he invisions himself as the new-age internet star to the secular world, functioning apart from the Church.

But, what bothers me the most is the apparent lack of facts on this controversy. I would like to see ‘evidence’ to convict or exculpate him. But, its probably a ‘she said – he said’ matter at best, w/o hard evidence that we could make judgments about.

Yes but where there is smoke there is fire. The one thing I DO know is that he is so very arrogant and has pride. He is going off the deep end.

 

[brb3]

the best thing is to ignore him, or to listen to him the way we listen to a Protestant pastor.

and how is that ??

We must recall ex-priest JC was a big friend of the Protestants & their pastors. If fact, this is what the hardcore orthodox Catholics [anti-Vatican 2 & JP2/Benedict] folks hold against Corapi, ----- claiming he was a new-age Vatican 2 Catholic, who rejected mainline, uncorrupted Latin Catholicism.