New SOLT Statement re: Father Corapi

[catharina]

To commit a sin is to be guilty of sin.
If you claim that someone is commiting sins,you are also claiming that he is guilty of those sins.

You are seriously mistaken.

God judges culpability.
Confessors may judge culpability.

We are not called to (or allowed to pass) such a judgment.

 

[jwinch2]

Now the facebook page has a petition circulating:

When was the last time people within the church built a petition to directly sway the pope and to tell him exactly what he should find.

Apparently those that are following Corapi have taken to dictating terms to the Pope.

Agreed, 100%. People seem to forget that Father Corapi himself has every right to appeal his case to the Holy See and has, to date, chosen not to do so. Unfortunately I am bit of a cynic and that means something to me.

Having said that, I would even have no problem with people requesting the Holy See to look into the matter. However, instructing Rome what to find in the investigation is, in my view, out of bounds.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Now the facebook page has a petition circulating:

When was the last time people within the church built a petition to directly sway the pope and to tell him exactly what he should find.

Apparently those that are following Corapi have taken to dictating terms to the Pope.

I have no problem with the Vatican or even the Pope taking a look at the case, and reporting their findings.

The problem is with the second part of the statement.

 

[whm]

???

Or the investigation was hindered, as stated on June 20th.
Or Fr. C’s own actions since the 20th were added proof of his instability.

A hindered and fumbling investigation might still lead to valid conclusions
in a period of two-plus weeks, esp considering Fr. C's own very public (name removed by moderator)ut.

There is no doubt that Fr. C's actions have interfered with the investigation.
Nonetheless, conclusions can be drawn, (related even to Fr. C's interference).

SOLT wasn’t the investigator were they? It was people from outside of the order (two religious and one lay). That may explain the difference in information between to two dates. It would be really weird for SOLT to investigate this situation themselves, in this specific case, since part of the investigation might cover their possible lack of control and oversight over this member of their order.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Agreed, 100%. People seem to forget that Father Corapi himself has every right to appeal his case to the Holy See and has to date, chosen not to do so. Unfortunately I am bit of a cynic and that means something to me.

I agree, something smells fishy to me about not appealing. If he thought he was being treated unfairly and if his case had merit, one would think he would appeal. Especially, if he is as devout as he says he is. And I bet Rome would be willing to look into the matter since he is a popular priest in the US and could be credited for bringing many people back.

Having said that, I would even have no problem with people requesting the Holy See to look into the matter. However, instructing Rome what to find in the investigation is, in my view, out of bounds.

Just posted something similar. Great minds think alike.

 

[valient_Lucy]

This is a very sincere question on my part…why would they line up the sins publicly? Is it because Fr John went public himself? I do not understand…but will continue to pray…

SOLT probably believes exactly what they say; that Fr. Corapi is not fit for public ministry right now and they want to warn people against following him.

 

[jwinch2]

SOLT wasn’t the investigator were they? It was people from outside of the order (two religious and one lay). That may explain the difference in information between to two dates. It would be really weird for SOLT to investigate this situation themselves, in this specific case, since part of the investigation might cover their possible lack of control and oversight over this member of their order.

Interesting point. It is entirely plausible that the persons conducting the investigation who, to my knowledge, were not members of the SOLT, delivered a report to the order between the time of these two releases. That would go a long way towards explaining any discrepancies which may exist,

 

[larsenl1]

I’ve been reading this thread and mostly not commenting. But now, I wonder, why is the overflowing concern for Father Corapi, the Bishop Emeritus, the Bishop, the Superior so prominent and I see very little concern for the people who were harmed?

Suppose that the SOLT investigation is accurate. What damage was done by wearing the clerical collar and behaving so poorly? Did he bring the alleged prostitute closer to Christ? Did he bring the drug dealers closer to Christ? Was the mere association in these circles of influence harmful? I am not suggesting that Father Corapi could not associate with these people but I remember that when Jesus dined with the tax collector and the prostitutes, he offered them God’s mercy and told them to sin no more. He was an example of how to live.

Supposing the allegations are true, I would expect that persons who wrote scathing words about the accuser to be obligated to apologize to the person(s) who made the SOLT aware of the problems? Shouldn’t we offer compassion and welcome those people who were led astray by the hypocrisy of the man’s words and his actions?

I worry that the devil is getting the last laugh because we are not merciful toward one another.

 

[valient_Lucy]

All this ‘concern’ without benefit of trial, judge or jury. I wonder.

Since when does a trial, judge, or jury guarantee the validity of something? OJ Simpson was found not guilty, and the US Supreme Court said that a woman has the constitutional right to kill her child.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I certainly agree that speculation, gossip, and “hanging” (whatever that means) are inappropriate. But in this case, the Archbishop of Corpus Christ, Father Corapi’s religious superior, is in fact, judge and jury, and is qualified to pass judgment on him. Further, while the courts require trial, judge, and jury, we the faithful are free to draw conclusions based on the public conduct and statements of people, informed by faith and charity.

Respectfully, “utterly innocent” is very unlikely. As far as I can tell, at least in its public statements, the Assocation (not order; the distinction is crucial) has acted appropriately and forthrightly. It did not make the proceedings, accusations, or any other information public; Father Corapi did that. It made no accusations of any kind toward anyone; Father Corapi publicly accused a sitting Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church and his religious superior (as SOLT is a diocesan Association, the ultimate superior is the Archbishop of that diocese) of lying, slander, and blackmail. Only after the conclusion of the fact-finding task did SOLT publish its findings, after Father Corapi made this a public matter, accusing SOLT of attempting to railroad him. They have a right to their good name as well, once the matter is made public.

It is entirely appropriate for the faithful to discuss and attempt to understand the public actions of public figures. I agree that speculation and gossip have no place here, but the discussion of public acts (such as Father Corapi’s and SOLT’s public statements) are entirely fair game for discussion.

Quite the contrary, my friend. We have quite a few facts. We have the public statements and behavior of Father Corapi and of Father Sheehan and SOLT. That comprises quite a few facts, including the fact which I repeated above.

Perhaps not. But both sides have had their say; SOLT that they found evidence of misconduct, and Father Corapi that he is being falsely accused. Based on their public actions and statements, I strongly tend to believe SOLT rather than Father Corapi.

thank you for your post. well said.

 

[jwinch2]

I’ve been reading this thread and mostly not commenting. But now, I wonder, why is the overflowing concern for Father Corapi, the Bishop Emeritus, the Bishop, the Superior so prominent and I see very little concern for the people who were harmed?

Suppose that the SOLT investigation is accurate. What damage was done by wearing the clerical collar and behaving so poorly? Did he bring the alleged prostitute closer to Christ? Did he bring the drug dealers closer to Christ? Was the mere association in these circles of influence harmful? I am not suggesting that Father Corapi could not associate with these people but I remember that when Jesus dined with the tax collector and the prostitutes, he offered them God’s mercy and told them to sin no more. He was an example of how to live.

Supposing the allegations are true, I would expect that persons who wrote scathing words about the accuser to be obligated to apologize to the person(s) who made the SOLT aware of the problems? Shouldn’t we offer compassion and welcome those people who were led astray by the hypocrisy of the man’s words and his actions?

I worry that the devil is getting the last laugh because we are not merciful toward one another.

Very good points. Some charity toward those who may be the true victims in this whole ordeal is probably long overdue…

 

[anthony022071]

I´d have to concur that SOLT did the right thing in speaking up now. SOLT gains nothing by warning others as to the activities of Corapi. They are looking out for Catholic´s who may blindly follow Corapi.

Do you know that his accusers at SOLT are telling the truth? It would be more blind to believe them than to believe him,since we don’t know about them,but we do we know much about him.

It is common sense that SOLT would not risk having Corapi file yet **ANOTHER lawsuit ** aimed at them if they allegations as to his behavior were not true. They are looking out for naive Catholic´s that have been taken in by Corapi´s words and don´t want to see more faithful Catholic´s hurt and divided by this matter.

They haven’t proven that he has been lying about anything. It would be more naive to believe what his accusers at SOLT say than what he says,since we have no experience of them. We don’t know their character.

Like I said before…it is never good to put a human being on a higher pedestal than God’s.

Corapi’s listeners do not do that. They just love him because he teaches the truth,and they are loyal to him for that reason. Catholics should show loyalty to those who are loyal to the teachings of the Church. If we have a detatched,critical attitude towards them when they are accused of wrongdoing,we show ourselves to be untrustworthy in regard to our brethren in the faith and truth itself.

 

[valient_Lucy]

Could there be a medical problem that would change his persona? Just wondering…

It’s certainly possible; there are certain mental disorders that can cause changes in personalities, even depression can do that to some extent. (I’ve noticed that in myself.)

I’m not saying that he has a mental disorder, but it is a possibility.

 

[Mirror_Mirror]

Now the facebook page has a petition circulating:

When was the last time people within the church built a petition to directly sway the pope and to tell him exactly what he should find.

Apparently those that are following Corapi have taken to dictating terms to the Pope.

Seems that there is becoming a growing problem of seperating the man from the message.

This is a quick summary what Dr. Ray said. He did a very good job on his show today when posed with the question of how we should respond to this issue. As he said, you may know A LOT ABOUT Dr. Ray based on what you hear on the radio or when you hear him speak, but that does not mean that you KNOW who Dr. Ray the person is.

Truth is we do not know John Corapi the person. We know a lot about him, but what he did when he stepped back from preaching, we just do not know. I am guilty of it as well, but we take all of the preaching and teaching that he did and just believed that he was filled with the Spirit in ALL aspects of his life. We want that to be true, but is it? This is something that we may never know.

 

[Kardinal]

Do you know that his accusers at SOLT are telling the truth? It would be more blind to believe them than to believe him,since we don’t know about them,but we do we know much about him.

Indeed we do. We know that he publicly accused a sitting bishop, his religious superior, of lying, blackmail, and public libel. Someone who regards and treats legitimate church authority in that way is not reliable for teaching doctrine, and is not fit for Catholic ministry.

They just love him because he teaches the truth,and they are loyal to him for that reason. Catholics should show loyalty to those who are loyal to the teachings of the Church. If we have a detatched,critical attitude towards them when they are accused of wrongdoing,we show ourselves to be untrustworthy in regard to our brethren in the faith and truth itself.

We should be loyal to the legitimate shepherds the Church has provided us, who are the bishops, the successors of the Apostles. They deserve our loyalty by virtue of their office and the charism it carries. When a bishop tells me that someone is unfit for ministry, I am obliged to obey them in faithful Catholic obedience.

Publicly accusing a sitting bishop of seriously sinful conduct is not loyalty to the magesterium, and should raise grave questions about the judgment and loyalty of the person doing the accusing.

 

[MarcoPolo]

This investigation would not be the first example I have ever seen of a project that appears to have little if any progress until the final stages.

The SOLT may well have believed their investigation hindered, and then stumbled upon plenty of evidence.

Very well. But I see no evidence of that in SOLT’s latest statement. And if we are going to posit various explanations of SOLT’s sudden change in confidence of the allegations, then I see no reason to exclude the possibility that Fr. Sheehan’s June 20th statement was less than forthcoming. Do you grant that as a potential explanation?

 

[joanofarc2008]

They haven’t proven that he has been lying about anything. It would be more naive to believe what his accusers at SOLT say than what he says,since we have no experience of them. We don’t know their character.

Go back to JREducation’s post. It is no longer for us to judge. They have been Canonically appointed through the Magisterium as Successors of Peter (and yes I am paraphrasing.) This is where obedience is a must.

As far as the 16 day turn of events. Has it occurred to anyone that some evidence is so black-and-white that it can change things istantaneously - forget 16 days.

 

[valient_Lucy]

We must clarify. Father Corapi is not guilty of any crime, because he is not charged with any crimes.

Whatever happened in his personal life, everything he taught and wrote was consistent with the faith and has not lost its value. You can encourage your husband to follow the good teachings of Fr. Corapi.

A General Superior has a canonical right to bring an investigation to a close and to promulgate his own conclusions. This right is given to him through Apostolic Succession, since all General Superiors of men are Ordinaries, even if they are not bishops. An Ordinary has the authority to judge, convict and discipline and his conclusion can only be reveresd by the pope. The rest of us are bound to abide by his decision. We don’t have to like it, but we may not fight it.

I would tell him all the good things that Father did and said. Then I would tell him, that like him and you, Father also makes mistakes. Even when he (your son) makes mistakes, you still love him and you still keep his artwork on your fridge, because it’s great art.

A priest, brother or sister can resign from ministry. He or she cannot resign from his state in life. You must apply for a dispensation and wait to see if it’s granted. Until it is granted, you remain Father, Brother or Sister. Your obligations to your state in life do not cease to exist.

The devil only wins if you die away from God.

Civil authority has no jurisdiction here, because Father has not been charged with a civil crime. We must respect the authority and power of Superiors General. They are ecclesiastical authorities. If the subject believes that the outcome is unjust, he can appeal it. The Superior General has the right and authority to draw his conclusion and to promulgate it. He also has to write the individual with his conclusions and advise him of his right to appeal and even offer to finance the appeal. As long as he does that, he has fulfilled what the Church expects of him.

This is true. The human condition does not annul the good that one does.

There are two problems with the Bishop’s response. First, the bishop is doing something that is not allowed. Bishops may not comment or involve themselves in the affairs of societies of apostolic life or religious orders, unless the community in question is a community of diocesan right and it is based in his diocese.

Second, the bishop fails to recall that when we waited until questions were answered and people moved to investigate the truth about an allegation, children were hurt. A suspension is not a punishment. It is a precautionary measure, albeit a very unpleasant one for the individual.

I do agree with him that there has been a lot of pain caused to the faithful. I’m not sure if there is another way of doing this.

Yay for JREducation! I’ve been hoping you’d find these threads and start commenting.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

I will offer prayer for Father Corapi. He was an excellent teacher.
I hope that in reality he did not do these things.
And if he DID, that God please quickly grant him the grace of full repentance
and full restoration.

Also, let us all remember,
“Let the one among you who is without Sin, cast the first stone.”

And a word about EWTN. I love EWTN. But it seems that over the years
some of EWTN’s celebrity priests have really ended up putting egg on EWTN’s face.

I think that the Devil is trying to destroy that network.

 

[catharina]

Indeed we do. We know that he publicly accused a sitting bishop, his religious superior, of lying, blackmail, and public libel. Someone who regards and treats legitimate church authority in that way is not reliable for teaching doctrine, and is not fit for Catholic ministry.

We should be loyal to the legitimate shepherds the Church has provided us, who are the bishops, the successors of the Apostles. They deserve our loyalty by virtue of their office and the charism it carries. When a bishop tells me that someone is unfit for ministry, I am obliged to obey them in faithful Catholic obedience.

Publicly accusing a sitting bishop of seriously sinful conduct is not loyalty to the magesterium, and should raise grave questions about the judgment and loyalty of the person doing the accusing.

For me, this is what approached the outer limits.
My own instinct, that he is very troubled, has more to with his stability than loyalty.