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

[surfinpure]

Wolves can come at any level. We have even had some in the Papacy in the past. It is not the office of Bishop that sanctifies the person in it.

But there are other leaders in the church that behave wolfishly also. that whole crew that brought Obama to Notre Dame for an honorary doctoral degree come to mind. People pushing the ordination of women, people pushing the marriage of same sex couples, people defending abortion etc, etc. Catholic politicians that publicly defy the faith.

Acts 20:28-31
28 Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son. 29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.

Paul is addressing the priests in this passage.

No. The Church is infallible and inviolable. Only the sheep get eaten.

Wolves among the sheep scatter the flock, and endanger souls (as Paul states above). No amount of wolves can destroy His Holy Bride, but a lot of lives have been damaged by the departure from the Truth.

The faithful need to be educated so that wolves can be recognized and avoided. They are real, and they are dangerous.

Good points, all. Again, I just wish this didn’t appear to be him pitted against the bishops out of bitterness regarding his present circumstance. Just having a very hard time shrugging off that sensation.

 

[guanophore]

One poster calling the woman an extortionist and another poster stating that the woman abides in a state of darkness - that seems to me to be beyond the pale (meaning quite out of line). Simply, we do not have the available facts to make such judgments. IMO.

It is a discussion about the news, Catharina. No one knows if she is extorting, or if she is in a state of darkness. That is why we are discussing the issues with the article “IF”.

If she is in the advanced stages of alcoholism, as has been asserted, then I can assure you she is in a state of darkness. She is in need of help most immediately.

IF in that state, she has resorted to extortion to support her habit, or is just acting out, she still needs help. We don’t have enough information to know if this is the case. The point being made is that she, as a layperson, does not have anyone in spiritual authority over her that might be able to compel her to get the help she needs. Sometimes legal action helps with that. She needs our prayers, and she may very well need a lawsuit, or some other equally jarring wakeup call.

 

[catharina]

It is a discussion about the news, Catharina. No one knows if she is extorting, or if she is in a state of darkness. That is why we are discussing the issues with the article “IF”.

If she is in the advanced stages of alcoholism, as has been asserted, then I can assure you she is in a state of darkness. She is in need of help most immediately.

IF in that state, she has resorted to extortion to support her habit, or is just acting out, she still needs help. We don’t have enough information to know if this is the case. **The point being made is that she, as a layperson, does not have anyone in spiritual authority over her that might be able to compel her to get the help she needs. ** Sometimes legal action helps with that. She needs our prayers, and she may very well need a lawsuit, or some other equally jarring wakeup call.

There is no way for anyone to know such a thing about
this woman and it seems uncharitable to leap to such conclusions.
For all we know this woman has had a fine spiritual director for years.

All need our prayers, each one involved in this tragic circumstance.

 

[sojo]

Other persons present at the work site who were physically assaulted by her reported that she promised to ruin him and bring him “down”. She apparently absconded with the website that he got to go with his autobiography, and is now selling it on ebay for $10,000…

I think you may have some stuff mixed up here? The website name was, according to Corapi, “stolen”. But this was, apparently, before he had purchased ownership of the name through any of the website domain name sites. Ethically wrong, no doubt, but the legality of it was murky enough that Corapi is still fighting it out in world of domain name law. The domain name was not for sale on ebay as far as I know (I could be wrong), but as selling on ebay is what I do for a living, I thought ebay no longer permitted the sale of intangibles such as domain names.

What was for sale, and allegedly (but again, we ONLY know this from the Corapi camp) was a rosary of Corapi’s. Since Corapi has not claimed the rosary was stolen by this employee, it may have been a gift to her and therefore within her right to sell (though tacky, yes.)

Yes, it is a matter of fact, but how much $? Perhaps he just wants to get back what he paid her in the severance agreement, during which she signed the non-disclosure agreement?

No, the suit apparently includes PUNITIVE damages, which means over and above the actual damages which would include the money paid for the signing of a non-disclosure agreement.

He has plenty of money, by all accounts, and does not need hers - if indeed she has any!

Yup! That’s what makes the whole thing sound so unseemly. Besides, he admits/claims she is a mentally ill or disturbed woman, so hitting her hard with such a claim when he truly doesn’t need the money, is especially unseemly.

 

[sojo]

If Fr. Corapi had written this on CAF instead of his own website:

“They are not leaders, they are delusional oxygen thieves—taking up the space and breathing the air that a real leader should occupy…”

His post would have been pulled as horridly uncharitable, he would receive a warning and if he pushed the subject, banned.

 

[guanophore]

I'm referring here to the various remarks, such as, "Apparently the bishops have the power to act as they see fit" and, "I didn't start this process; the Bishop of Corpus Christi threatened to calumniate me (paraphrasing) in a letter to other bishops if my superior didn't start the investigation, against his better judgment."

I was assuming those were the comments to which you were referring, but I wanted to be sure.

He is absolutely right. The Bishops do have the power to act as they see fit.

I don’t see how his disagreement with the bishop creates any schism. I think it would be more prudent to keep such comments to himself, but how is that “schismatic”?

And then, "There are those in the Church who want me gone" and "I was thrown out like yesterday's garbage."

This is a true statement, and has been for many years. At least, that there are people in positions of power that want him silenced. They are not necessarily clergy, though. He has been even harder on the Catholic poliiticians who betray the faith.

The comment about feeling thrown out like garbage is an expression of his feeling of being discarded by the Church as useless. While it expresses hurt and a feeling of betrayal, and also might better not have been made public, I don’t see how it is schismatic either.

And of course there’s yesterday’s vague admonition to beware of “wolves in sheep’s clothing.”

This is nothing new, either. He has been saying this for the whole of his public ministry, beginning when he was still going to seminary. There were bishops who would not support a candidate unless he subscribed to female ordination.

This is also only an echoing of St. Paul, and I don’t see how it is schismatic either.

Now, does all of this explicitly state that we ought not to trust our bishops?  No.  Does it lend itself to that inference?  I'm afraid it does.

It does not to me. It is simply a commentary on the very reality that we have people in positions of authority and influence in the Church that are wolves. The 98% of the Canadian Bishops that refused to support Humana Vitae among them.

In his book, The Way, St. Josemaria Escriva admonishes us never to speak ill of a priest, even if what we know is true, because it will cause scandal. If this is true of priests, how much more of bishops?

Yes. I think it would be better for ALL of us not to speak ill of Corapi, his bishop, his community, etc.

 Given what you might call a cultural "crisis of rebellion" and widespread distrust of authority, this could be a particularly bad time to lead the faithful to doubt the leadership of the Church.

It is appropriate to call a spade a spade. When a person calls themself a catholic but does not embrace or practice the faith, they need to be called to account. This can be done in charity, without bitterness, and without schism. It may not be his place or calling to do it,but it does need to be done.

Should he speak out against corruption? Absolutely. But to the authorities who are in a position to do something about it, not to the people, who are easily swayed against authority.

His talks have always encouraged the faithful to pray for, and love their disobedient and abusive priests. I expect that he will continue with this message. I am another who would be very disappointed if he does not right himself in that matter.

I don’t claim that he has been disobedient, and I hope for everyone’s sake he has not. What I refer to is the extremism found among so many of his “fans” on facebook and his BSD website. These are some of the sentiments I can recall, and though I paraphrase, I do not exaggerate here:

“I’m not putting another dollar into a collection plate until the Church rectifies this situation.”

“This makes me ashamed to call myself Catholic.”

“I hope that bishop knows he’ll be accountable in judgment for what he’s done.”

"Satan is at work in these so-called ‘bishops.’ "

“I’m going to have to re-think being a Catholic after this.”

“Father Corapi, we will follow you wherever you go. We know that YOU are truly God’s shepherd and that the Holy Spirit is leading you.”

…Do all of these sentiments amount to formal schism? No, you’re right, and thanks be to God for that. Nonetheless, there is a very powerful undercurrent of rebellion that ties them together. If you haven’t already, to get an idea of what I’m talking about, read the comments after his first couple of announcements on his facebook page. They’re positively nauseating. I imagine that’s what prompted him to remind everyone to “follow the bishops.” I only wish he were giving the appearance of doing as he says.

Wow. That is indeed quite sickening. It is a testimony to the need of the flock for shepherding and education in their faith, as well as some maturity, it sounds like. Surely reasonable Catholics can see that this is just immature spouting?!

 

[guanophore]

Good points, all. Again, I just wish this didn’t appear to be him pitted against the bishops out of bitterness regarding his present circumstance. Just having a very hard time shrugging off that sensation.

I don’t think we should shrug it off. It is very clear in his communications. It should call us all to caution and fervent intercession.

 

[guanophore]

There is no way for anyone to know such a thing about
this woman and it seems uncharitable to leap to such conclusions.
For all we know this woman has had a fine spiritual director for years.

All need our prayers, each one involved in this tragic circumstance.

The average parishioner does not have such regular and attentive spiritual direction. But, even if she does have it, they are not in a position to “compel” her to seek treatment or to accomplish an intervention. They can urge, suggest, and even direct her to get help, but there is nothing like a legal judgment.

 

[catharina]

The average parishioner does not have such regular and attentive spiritual direction. But, even if she does have it, they are not in a position to “compel” her to seek treatment or to accomplish an intervention. They can urge, suggest, and even direct her to get help, but there is nothing like a legal judgment.

Again, the assumptions.
For all any of us know, she is in treatment
and has been in treatment for years.

Why assume the most dire, the very negative view?

 

[guanophore]

I think you may have some stuff mixed up here? The website name was, according to Corapi, "stolen". But this was, apparently, before he had purchased ownership of the name through any of the website domain name sites. Ethically wrong, no doubt, but the legality of it was murky enough that Corapi is still fighting it out in world of domain name law. The domain name was not for sale on ebay as far as I know (I could be wrong), but as selling on ebay is what I do for a living, I thought ebay no longer permitted the sale of intangibles such as domain names.

What was for sale, and allegedly (but again, we ONLY know this from the Corapi camp) was a rosary of Corapi’s. Since Corapi has not claimed the rosary was stolen by this employee, it may have been a gift to her and therefore within her right to sell (though tacky, yes.)

You are absolutly right, sojo, I was mixing up my assets! Or her assets, I guess.

The domain name is being sold from the site redirection.

I wondered if, at some point, he asked her to set it up, when she was working for him?

No, the suit apparently includes PUNITIVE damages, which means over and above the actual damages which would include the money paid for the signing of a non-disclosure agreement.

Right, but it is possible to ask for a dollar, or even a penny. The judgment for the plaintiff is valid, even if the defendant has no assets, and the judgement is uncollectable. What comes out, though, is the “preponderance of evidence”.

Yup! That’s what makes the whole thing sound so unseemly. Besides, he admits/claims she is a mentally ill or disturbed woman, so hitting her hard with such a claim when he truly doesn’t need the money, is especially unseemly.

If indeed this is the case, I would agree.

 

[guanophore]

If Fr. Corapi had written this on CAF instead of his own website:

“They are not leaders, they are delusional oxygen thieves—taking up the space and breathing the air that a real leader should occupy…”

His post would have been pulled as horridly uncharitable, he would receive a warning and if he pushed the subject, banned.

This is a very good point. And if he wants to continue speaking in that manner, then it is certainly best for him to do so NOT as a representative of the Church in any way. It is awfully harsh. John the Baptist type of harsh!

 

[sojo]

Thank you for your charitable comments Guanophore.

And anyone who hasn’t done so yet but is following this whole mess, the full Independence Day post from Father Corapi should really go read the whole post. Warning: it is looong! It is on his Black SheepDog website.

I admit, I found it a bit disturbing. OK, more than a bit disturbing. At the very least, it made me hope I never hear another sheep dog, sheep, wolf analogy ever again for the rest of my life.

 

[garygodin]

People who know better than Fr. Corapi about how he should deal with being treated as he has been (a bishop has suspended him from his priestly ministry) would do well to listen to his side of the story before making comments.

And YES…there are bishops who are not working IN UNION with the Pope. These bishops are not part of the Magisterium. What do you call the bishops who voted against the encyclical of Pope Paul VI? In the Winnipeg agreement of 1968, 98% of the Canadian bishops voted against Humanae Vitae. In the US it was not much better many bishops were advising the lay people to act “according to your own consciences”. So we NEED priests such as Fr. Corapi to work at weeding
out such ugly stuff. If he can do it better as a lay person, then maybe it is God’s will.

Ship, I think a lot of the criticism against Father is coming from your “Professional Catholics”.

 

[surfinpure]

If Fr. Corapi had written this on CAF instead of his own website:

“They are not leaders, they are delusional oxygen thieves—taking up the space and breathing the air that a real leader should occupy…”

His post would have been pulled as horridly uncharitable, he would receive a warning and if he pushed the subject, banned.

Thank you. I’m relieved to hear I’m not the only one who found this line offensive. It’s remarks like these that cause many of us to wonder if the good Father has his head screwed on straight at the moment.

As a friend of mine put it, “The old Father Corapi we knew would have kicked this Father Corapi’s butt!”

 

[guanophore]

Thank you. I’m relieved to hear I’m not the only one who found this line offensive. It’s remarks like these that cause many of us to wonder if the good Father has his head screwed on straight at the moment.

As a friend of mine put it, “The old Father Corapi we knew would have kicked this Father Corapi’s butt!”

LOL! I think you are right!

He needs one of those literary devices right now.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Thank you for your charitable comments Guanophore.

And anyone who hasn’t done so yet but is following this whole mess, the full Independence Day post from Father Corapi should really go read the whole post. Warning: it is looong! It is on his Black SheepDog website.

I admit, I found it a bit disturbing. OK, more than a bit disturbing. At the very least, it made me hope I never hear another sheep dog, sheep, wolf analogy ever again for the rest of my life.

I am reading through the message now. While I think Corapi makes some interesting points, what I am having problems with is the image of a priest putting himself into the role of a warrior, like a soldier or a police officer. There is something so militant about his entire attitude right now…all the talk about we sheep fearing the sheepdog, wanting the sheepdog to cut off his fangs, spray paint himself white, etc. The bitterness and anger comes through and not only does he seem angry at the Church herself but at us, the naive sheep who are, as he says, or as he quotes the old soldier “kind, gentle, productive creatures…”

He says he means no insult by his metaphors, but there is a certain degree of superiority in all these mental images. For someone in the military, or a police officer, perhaps that is necessary. But a priest?? Really?? Is that how Corapi imagines himself, a lone protester of all of us harmless but rather stupid sheep? Okay, Jesus used the sheep analogy, but He is Jesus! He has a right, he’s God.

I will not post again, but I will say that this entire incident troubles me to my core. I feel there is too much ego involved on Corapi’s side - way too much pride in this “lone guardian” role he is assuming himself to be in. I understand his indignation, but all this “I won’t lay down and die as THEY want me to” does not seem like someone who is trying to be more like Jesus. Wasn’t that what Judas expected from Jesus? Not what Jesus came to do - he surrendered to the will of His Father in Heaven.

But I will pray for Corapi. I hope this controversy dies down and his followers do not keep it stirred up.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Okay, I am already breaking my vow not to post again, but in reading the comments on Corapi’s blog, I came across this one. How can anyone see this as anything else but IDOL WORSHIP???

“Fr. Corapi our BlackSheepDog thank you for what you shared about the sheepdog. You are definitely our wonderful sheepdog and how blessed we are to have you……You are so very wise and speak such truth. This truth you give us is so very needed and how we do need it and how we need you to give it to us. Thank you so much for all the decisions you have made since March. I hate to think of the loss we would have had if you had decided to just wait it out which could have taken forever if ever. I believe some in our church felt threatened, even jealous by your popularity and this was their chance. However, for the time being it is their loss. We, your sheep, are not dumb we are smart for we have been trained well by you……we know who to follow. THANK YOU WE LOVE YOU AND I CANT WAIT TO READ YOUR BOOK…….”

Do you see the danger here? People are considering themselves to be CORAPI’S sheep, not God’s!!! This is not unusual in that comments section.

 

[PRmerger]

I am reading through the message now. While I think Corapi makes some interesting points, what I am having problems with is the image of a priest putting himself into the role of a warrior, like a soldier or a police officer. There is something so militant about his entire attitude right now…all the talk about we sheep fearing the sheepdog, wanting the sheepdog to cut off his fangs, spray paint himself white, etc.

I think there is room for both militancy and pacifism in the Church.

The point is well limned in the movie “The Mission”: Jeremy Iron’s position in the end, when the Spanish/Portuguese (?) are attacking the mission is to lay down his life. Robert de Niro, fights. Both are right, IMHO.

 

[vz71]

Having read his blog a few times now, I can see a change.

He is still a very skilled speaker.
But one can readily tell he does not speak with the authority he once had.

I wonder if he can notice the difference himself?
I wonder if he regrets making these decisions?

 

[Roy5]

Gosh, I haven’t followed this controversy nor this thread all that closely. But a few random and rapid comments.

1. Fr. Corapi may be innocent, of course, but his defensive stance makes me wonder. It seems to reflect an arrogance which came through when I would watch him.

2. It's easy out to pin scandals on Satan. That's a charge hard to refute. It also tends to transfer the blame elsewhere. I don't buy it. I blame them on the weakness of humankind. Look at all the politicians and others who fall victim to temptation. 

3. I personally believe that such situations help demonstrate that the celibate requirement should be revised. Priests should have an option - to remain single and celibate or marry and be faithful. Marriage was instituted by God and I've never understood why priests are denied a relationship that brings so many joy, companionship, a 'helpmate', family and love. The first commandment in the Bible, as I recall, is "Be fruitful and multiply." I suggest that the celibacy rule was imposed for pragmatic reasons. I believe that we read in scripture that a Bishop should have only one wife. Fair enough.  Millions of Protestant ministers around the world have been married and remained faithful, though some among them. of course, yielded to temptation, also. We're all human before we're Catholic, Protestant or whatever.

 4. This conclusion is disputed, of course, but it seems obvious to me that without a healthy outlet for our God-given sexual impulses many people will yield to those strong and immoral urges. Marriage doesn't solve the problem entirely (witness the governor of California) but it helps direct innate sexual energy where it should go.

 5. Again my view. Fr. Corapi has presented the most reactionary face of Catholicism. He seemed to enjoy being 'more Catholic than the Pope', ready to scold, make indictments, cast aspersions, etc.  While he sometimes loved to tell of what a big sinner he had been, he was very judgemental. Hm. Maybe he should have taken Matt. 7:1-3 more seriously. What troubled me even more than his talks was that so many in his audience would loudly applaud his continual denunciations.

 6. I hnope he is innocent. If he is - or isn't - God guide him during this difficult time. And God guide each of us, too. We all need help.