Fr John Corapi has Announced in a Video Message that he is Leaving the Priesthood

[Joe_5859]

The problem with Father Corapi’s case is that many people feel that they have a right to know. This is not true. Canon Law does not guarantee us the right to know. In fact, Canon Law protects the privacy of the accused and the accuser. There is no moral right to know what happens in the private life of another person. It is up to the person to reveal whatever they choose to reveal.

Thank you for this wonderful reminder, Brother JR. If the Catholic blogosphere (including ourselves) took this advice to heart, I think we would all be better off!

 

[tm30]

I don’t really think he will have one. Since Corapi has effectively blocked the investigation, there is really nothing more he can do, is there? I think that is why Corapi says that there was no chance that his faculties would be restored, and so he is choosing to “move on”.

Why doesn’t he release his other employees from their NDA’s so they can testify on his behalf. Or write up a waiver for this particular circumstance (speaking to SOLT).

What is wrong with waiting for the Bishop to make a final decision?

I think his decision is final. Corapi is under suspension, and this will not change. Did I misunderstand your question?

If a priest is suspended from duties he doesn’t perform in the first place, does anyone in the forest hear it?

Yes, but if he is laicized, then the Church does not have the level of jurisdiciton over him as they do should he remain a priest. The potential is much greater of a loose canon bringing harm to the flock. If he remains a priest under Holy Orders, he can be reassigned, and effectively kept quiet and out of the public eye.

I don’t understand why Holy Orders are important to him since he doesn’t do anything a Protestant preacher doesn’t do; and he’s stated clearly that the Sacramental aspect (which is essential) doesn’t really figure into his career path anyway.

I understand, with regard to the protection of children, it is necessary to respond immediately and sometimes drastically to prevent abuse. But he is being treated as a child molester would be, when the allegations have nothing to do with that.

After tens of millions of dollars doled out after ignoring the molestation problem, if formal charges are brought before them, that are of a sexual nature, you can bet every last dime Church lawyers are not willing to accept the liability of something else happening after they are made aware of allegations. Fair or not, that’s reality. It doesn’t matter if it’s a child or an adult; the Church is not going to presume anything.

I am confused by this. It was not his choice to be relieved of his duties as a priest. He did not want this, and can’t do anything to change it.

Not true. He can let the process go forward towards exoneration, but it will involve releasing others from the NDAs to testify on his behalf without fear of reprisal. He’s chosen to make this a permanent suspension by not cooperating.

I think you have it backwards. His choice to accept that he will be suspended permanently had nothing to do with the investigation coming to a halt. It would remain halted had he returned to his community and lived out the rest of his days as a suspended priest.

Because he will not let anyone on his staff give statements to SOLT without putting them in danger of “breach of contract”. Are you seeing the conflict of interest here?

I don’t hear any “damning of authorities” at all. He does not think the process is fair, he feels mistreated, and he believes he and his Bishop are the victims of politicians and other Bishops he has pissed off over the years.

And telling this to the world does what? Slander goes both ways, you know, and in a one-way forum, there’s no rebuttal contrary to his characterizations.

When you listen to his talks, it is easy to see how many bishops would complain about him. He has a very “in your face” way of confronting Bishops tolerating sin. In one story he told at a meeting he attended in South America, or about the Latin Church losing members to evengelicals, it sounded like he got on the wrong side of a whole roomful of them! I can only imagine how many complaints get back to his bishop.

I’m sure he knew he would get on their wrong side. Speaking out assumes certain risks, and although I fully agree with calling them on the carpet, the consequences are still predictable.

 

[tm30]

I don’t think it is at all necessary to take sides. He has been clear that he does not want an “adversarial” relationship with the authorities, even though he does not agree with the process. He has urged people to obey the bishop.

“Obey these horrible people…”

Maybe he does have a problem with respect and obedience. I am sure there are many character flaws that he must struggle with daily as we all do.

Agree.

His expressions seemed angry, frustrated, and betrayed. I think a lot has happened that we don’t know about, and will never know about.

When he refers to “the last few years”, it seems like calumny of this kind has been going on for some time,

…unless he lets employees testify on his behalf. Certainly they are aware of this calumny.

and his feeling of being unsupported in his apostolate as well

“His” apostolate. Doesn’t “his” apostolate belong to the Church?

 

[larsenl1]

**I agree with Shoshanna’s posts, esp. 647 where she considers him a prophet. **

He was too political. He knew it, and said it anyway. He has what they call…guts.

He’s paying for it now, as he knew he would, and, like people’s attitude about Mary, the hearts of many have been laid bare. Well, I’ve been seeing the hearts, and, some are as black as can be. Pious on the outside, hypocritical and pompous on the inside.

This poor man is between a rock and a hard place. He is going to be filleted and flambeed no matter which way he turns. The good ones always go through the “gauntlet”.

He couldn’t take not having his say, which is what would have happened had he gone “gently into that good night”. It would have killed him.

Well, it is happening the same as if he had meekly gone into seclusion, which was his only other choice.

Either way, he is going to be crucified. This is the death he was bound to follow Christ to, and he will partake of it however imperfectly. He chose his path long ago.

The use of literary license here is offending. There are actually Catholic priests and believers who are literally beheaded, tortured, and abused. To say that Fr Corapi is going to be fileted and flambeed is wrong. He is going through and administerial process which is now in the civil courts. The blogs and print commentaries are copying and distributing information, much of which the original source is Fr Corapi himself.

Is this hurtful? Is this divisive? Yes, but it is not PHYSICAL TORTURE, DISMEMBERMENT OR DEATH.

St. Polycarp was executed. St. Stephen was executed. Many Christians in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, north Africa, S. America are actually physically dismembered.

I have read this thread every day and held my tongue but this hyperbole is just too much.

Can you tone it down and return to earth?

 

[larsenl1]

One of my friends is a priest who was falsely accused of “improper conduct”. His father is also a good friend of mine.

The priest-friend had to sit around his parents’ house, going crazy with worry? … with uncertainty? … with absolutely no news, no information, no communication with the chancery office.

They all knew the accusations were false. They were not only false and from a location where he had never been, but they were anonymous accusations, as well. Anti-catholic lawyers even said the accusations were false.

Anyway, after hanging by his thumbs and twisting in the wind, he got a simple phone call to go back to work.

No explanations. Nothing. No trial. No hearings. No questions. No insight into the investigation.

Just, “go back to work”.

How long was he just sitting doing nothing?

Two years.

I would hope that he would have not been doing nothing. Didn’t he pray, say the office duties, go to adoration?

DHS investigations are similar. I was accused of alleged child abuse to my own child. It was spiritual torment. However, this is not actually that unusual and Fr Corapi is skewing his communications as if the situation is specifically out to destroy him. It is actually to protect him. If one is silent one cannot slander or misrepresent to the public.

 

[valient_Lucy]

The use of literary license here is offending. There are actually Catholic priests and believers who are literally beheaded, tortured, and abused. To say that Fr Corapi is going to be fileted and flambeed is wrong. He is going through and administerial process which is now in the civil courts. The blogs and print commentaries are copying and distributing information, much of which the original source is Fr Corapi himself.

Is this hurtful? Is this divisive? Yes, but it is not PHYSICAL TORTURE, DISMEMBERMENT OR DEATH.

St. Polycarp was executed. St. Stephen was executed. Many Christians in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, north Africa, S. America are actually physically dismembered.

I have read this thread every day and held my tongue but this hyperbole is just too much.

Can you tone it down and return to earth?

I have to agree. There are Christians and Catholics in the Middle East and North Africa that are being persecuted and martyred for the Faith, including priests and whole parishes that have been killed during Mass/Divine Liturgy. Not to mention the Church is still being persecuted in China. I don’t think we can truly compare Fr. Corapi’s suffering for the faith with their suffering.

 

[guanophore]

Too much elevating of the man, in sentimentality, in ignoring the mystical body of the Church.

I can certainly appreciate the tendency to put people on a pedestal, especially when one feels very helped by that person, or even as if their whole spiritual life has been salvaged by listening to that person, as some have testified in their posts. I don’t under understand the last part, though. Can you help me understand what that has to do tiwh “ignoring the mystical body of the Church”?

Quite frankly. Fr. Corapi is distressed from his two entrees. I Really hope Christ provides him the strength to walk away from the precipice.

Amen to that! I perceive some great distress also.

He contradicts himself four times here for instance.

His blog shouts warning signs…to sum up his blog, he essentially threatens to go back into the world. He says he’s not leaving the church. Yet he wants to go back into the world.

Corapi does not belong to a religious order. The society (SOLT) is an apostolate that is “in the world”. It has houses all over the world, and the members don’t take the same kinds of vows one does to join a religious order. That is why he was allowed to live in a home of his own while still being a member.

He can’t do any good by doing that…it’ll only mislead people who’ve come to know him…you can’t mix the otherworldly, with the worldly.

They are mixed, whether we like it or not. We are pilgrims on this earth, and we are “in the world, but not of it”. He is called to be a preacher, and if his bishop cannot tolerate his preaching, then he will have to go elsewhere. He can’t just fail to do what God has called him to do because certain people don’t like it.

His human weaknesses are screaming off the pages…

Yes, I see this too.

 

[guanophore]

However, Fr Corapi does not fit this description. He is not accused of any abuse to children. He does however, belong to an order that already has a place where he can ‘retire’ to and has been invited to.

I think this is a common misunderstanding. SOLT is not a religious order. I sure would like to see him spend some time in community and soak up some support and spiritual guidance, and I am glad that SOLT has afforded him this opportunity. But clearly he is not ready to “retire”, which he equates to “lying down and dying”.

My concern with him continuing to teach outside of his order or priestly role, is again that he would not be under any authority.

Yes. This is not appropriate. That is why it is better for him to accept that his faculties will not be reinstated and “move on”, as he calls it. If he wants to be in public speaking, he can no longer do so as a priest, or an authorized represenative of the Church. That is not the same as “leaving the Church”, as many have misunderstood it to mean. It just means he cannot represent the Church in an official capacity in a public venue.

He is well known as a priest and if he begins speaking on political issues he can become a source of confusion to Catholics and to the general public.

I don’t see h ow. I think American Catholics are already confused with regard to politics, and would be well served by any solid Catholic who knows their faith standing up and shouting on the rooftops what it means to act like a Catholic in the marketplace.

 I do not think he would teach anything against the faith, but most political issues are in the area of "prudential judgment" and I don't think his style allows for much of that.

He does kinda have that “in your faith” style. I disagree, though. I think most American Catholics refuse the teachings of the Church when it comes to politics. If they did not, our country would be going in a much different direction.

Basic faith is definitely black and white, and he expresses that well. Prudential judgment allows for more subtleties and he’s not a subtle guy!

No, he really is not. But, we need both. CAF has published an excellent voter’s guide on that.

 

[Ignatias20]

After having read several dozen posts here on this thread I am wondering if some of the posters really did read what the Superior of SOLT posted on other sites. Do they know that it was the Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas who asked SOLT to resend Fr. Corapi’s faculties? Do they know that the Bishop emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas is totally against what the new Bishop did with Fr. Corapi?

I do not see on this thread that many understand what has happened. Fr. Corapi is still a Roman Catholic. He was not allowed to know what the charges are nor who it was that complained. The former Bishop says that Cannon Law is not being followed as does a Cannon Lawyer.

I am waiting for the Bishop of Corpus Christi to admit that he over reacted. Did you know that the present Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas does not approve of SOLT and wants them to move their headquarters? Lets be patient and pray.for it seems that SOLT has an enemy.

 

[PRmerger]

Catholic apologist Mark Shea is mad as a hornet at Fr. Corapi.

markshea.blogspot.com/2011/06/gaping-hole-in-fr-corapis-story.html

Apparently, there is no evidence that Fr. Corapi served as a Green Beret, despite the SOLT site believing he was.

And he (Shea) seems to have a problem with Fr. Corapi’s ever-darkening beard.

 

[guanophore]

After having read several dozen posts here on this thread I am wondering if some of the posters really did read what the Superior of SOLT posted on other sites. Do they know that it was the Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas who asked SOLT to resend Fr. Corapi’s faculties? Do they know that the Bishop emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas is totally against what the new Bishop did with Fr. Corapi?

I think that much is plain, but irrelevant. The new Bishop is in charge, and whether everyone else in the world disagrees with him, it is still his responsibility, and his duty, to take action in the case. It is the responsibility of the flock, as well as the accused, and the Emeritus to support his authority.

I am waiting for the Bishop of Corpus Christi to admit that he over reacted. Did you know that the present Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas does not approve of SOLT and wants them to move their headquarters? Lets be patient and pray.for it seems that SOLT has an enemy.

I have never ready anything about the new Bishop not wanting SOLT. Where are you gettin that? I can only imagine, with a public figure like Corapi, it must cause him a lot of headaches. Maybe now that Corapi is out it will calm down and the Bishop will have a respite?

 

[guanophore]

Catholic apologist Mark Shea is mad as a hornet at Fr. Corapi.

markshea.blogspot.com/2011/06/gaping-hole-in-fr-corapis-story.html

Apparently, there is no evidence that Fr. Corapi served as a Green Beret, despite the SOLT site believing he was.

And he (Shea) seems to have a problem with Fr. Corapi’s ever-darkening beard.

Honestly!

I have never heard Corapi say anything besides “it wasn’t GB trainig ,but it was LIKE it”. I am sure it would help if he could clarify, as it goes to credibility. That is such an OLD screen shot. How do we know he did not catch an employee making a mistake and get it corrected?

I liked his beard better gray, also, but how is that a moral issue?

 

[surfinpure]

He was not allowed to know what the charges are nor who it was that complained.

This is not true. At the time he was placed on administrative leave both he and Santa Cruz Media issued statements indicating they knew exactly who brought the charges and what they were.

 

[redrosetea]

“Lead Kindly Light, amid the encircling gloom. Lead Thou me on! The night is dark, and I am far from home; Lead Thou me on! Keep Thou my feet; I do not ask to see the distant scene — one step enough for me.”
— Cardinal Newman, The Pillar of the Cloud

 

[PRmerger]

Honestly!

I have never heard Corapi say anything besides “it wasn’t GB trainig ,but it was LIKE it”. I am sure it would help if he could clarify, as it goes to credibility. That is such an OLD screen shot. How do we know he did not catch an employee making a mistake and get it corrected?

Well, honestly, I never heard him say that he was a Green Beret either.

But why was it on the SOLT website? Even his community did not know this was incorrect?

I liked his beard better gray, also, but how is that a moral issue?

It does give one pause, picturing a priest dying his beard.

Just like a nun wearing earrings. It’s just one of those things that makes you go

 

[SoulSeeker]

I would refer everybody to this National Catholic Register article. It contains quotes from his superior, a representative of the Diocese of Helena MT (where he is physically located) and the Diocese of Corpus Christi.

In addition, please note that Fr. Corapi filed a trademark application for “The Black-Sheep Dog” back in April of 2010. Here are two pertinent screenshots from the US Patent and Trademark Office database:

(the images below are thumbnails. To see the full size image, click on the corresponding thumbnail below)

img802.imageshack.us/img802/2843/11112.jpg
img30.imageshack.us/img30/9431/11113.jpg

I am not attributing any bad motives with the above…it just is curious that he would file for that trademark over a year ago and announce it the day before priestly ordinations.

FYI: "Judge not, least ye be … " (get it?)

If you take the time to visit Fr. Corapi’s blog he clearly explains the registering and trademark of the name “Black Sheep-dog”:

The following post is dated June 23, 2011 at www.blacksheepdog.us by Fr. Corapi:

QUOTE: “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.”

So sayeth the SoulSeeker …

 

[SoulSeeker]

I would refer everybody to this National Catholic Register article. It contains quotes from his superior, a representative of the Diocese of Helena MT (where he is physically located) and the Diocese of Corpus Christi.

In addition, please note that Fr. Corapi filed a trademark application for “The Black-Sheep Dog” back in April of 2010. Here are two pertinent screenshots from the US Patent and Trademark Office database:

(the images below are thumbnails. To see the full size image, click on the corresponding thumbnail below)

img802.imageshack.us/img802/2843/11112.jpg
img30.imageshack.us/img30/9431/11113.jpg

I am not attributing any bad motives with the above…it just is curious that he would file for that trademark over a year ago and announce it the day before priestly ordinations.

FYI: "Judge not, least ye be … " (get it?)

If you take the time to visit Fr. Corapi’s blog he clearly explains the registering and trademark of the name “Black Sheep-dog”:

The following post is dated June 23, 2011 at www.blacksheepdog.us by Fr. Corapi:

QUOTE: “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.”

So sayeth the SoulSeeker …

 

[Shoshana]

FYI: "Judge not, least ye be … " (get it?)

If you take the time to visit Fr. Corapi’s blog he clearly explains the registering and trademark of the name “Black Sheep-dog”:

The following post is dated June 23, 2011 at www.blacksheepdog.us by Fr. Corapi:

QUOTE: “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.”

So sayeth the SoulSeeker …

The link does not work though… Try this link: en.gloria.tv/?media=169652

 

[JM3]

The link does not work though… Try this link: en.gloria.tv/?media=169652

try this one.

theblacksheepdog.us/

 

[DORIS_HARTSOCK]

AMEN to timmo’s post.i’m so sad about fr.coropi.GOD BLESS this wonderful priest.he’s another wonderful priest who’s being put down.i’m a 79 year old cradle catholic who has shed many tears for our beloved church since vatican11.there have been so many abuses by bishops,priest and nuns who have in so many instances have done things against our faith but are never held accountable.there have been so many cases where a priest is following church teachings they send him to a parish{in a desert in california} in a remote area but if you go against church teaching you get a great parish.my prayers are with fr. coropi.