Whether his superior’s findings are accurate or not there are several things that all of us must keep in mind.
Father Corapi is a human being. As such, he deserves respect, charity and forgiveness. St. Francis of Assisi wrote into one of our admonitions that if a brother sins we must never deny him forgiveness. If the brother does not ask for forgiveness, we should go to him and ask him if he wants our forgiveness. If the brother insists that he does not need our forgiveness (because he believes he’s innocent or above us), we must grant the forgiveness as Christ granted forgiveness to those who never asked for it. If the brother has not sin, the forgiveness is not wasted, because the grace of charity returns to us. If he is guilty, the forgiveness is truly necessary.
As far as those who keep bringing up the issue of obedience, I’m unsure why this continues to be brought up. If any Catholic does not fully understand the theology of religious obedience, I suggest that he or she read the Rule of St. Benedict. St. Benedict is the father of religious obedience. All models of religious obedience are based on his theology, which is very well articulated in his rule. Instead of second guessing what obedience should be or as someone did on a blog who quoted Aquinas, go to the source, St. Benedict. Even Aquinas was not talking about religious life when he speaks about obedience. Quoting him is out of context.
Benedict made it very clear that once one promises obedience to the superior, one surrenders one’s will, one’s wishes, one’s goals, one’s thoughts, one’s gifts and all that one has or is. It is all handed over to Christ who speaks through the superior. Benedict does not get into the nonsense that 20th century Catholics get into, “What if the superior is a sinner?” or “What if the superior is wrong?” Benedict made it clear that the efficacy of the vow of obedience lays not in the virtue of the superior or in his wisdom. That and $1.50 will get you a ride on a city bus. The efficacy of obedience lays in the act of submission on the part of the person who obeys. When we obey a superior, we give up a lot and we do so out of love, not because the superior is wise or right. The superior can be a fool and totally wrong. The virtue is found in our willingness to submit to one who is a fool and may be wrong, because we love Jesus Christ so much that we want to do exactly as he did when he was on trial before Pilate. Obedience is an act of love. Love always has a price.
Someone posted that Bl. John Paul II ordered Father to go out and preach; therefore the superior cannot trump the pope’s orders. There are two errors here. One is canonical and the other is historical. Let’s first deal with the canonical issue. A religious superior can trump a pope, if the pope’s mandate is not given under obedience. If the pope says to a newly ordained priest, “I want you to go out to evangelize the world,” and the religious superior find that this command is not in the best interest of the individual and of his community, he can rescind that request. It only becomes an order binding under obedience when the pope puts it in writing and gives it to the major superior. The pope would have to say to the major superior that he wants this man for this purpose.
Let’s look at the historical error. Father himself has said that at the time of his ordination, the major superior told him to make preaching and teaching his ministry rather than serving in a parish. The reason was that he is too talented to waste in a parish. It was not the pope. It was the superior who gave him this mandate. The mandate is perfectly legitimate. However, if the constitutions allow it, the incoming superior can annul every command given by the incumbent. Father has repeatedly said that the founder gave him this mandate. He has never said that the successor does not have the canonical right to change the mandate. To the best of my knowledge, there are only three founders whose mandates can never be annulled or abrogated: Benedict, Augustine and Francis of Assisi. It would take an act by the Apostolic See to go over their heads. Their successors are stuck with what these guys left us. Every other founder is replaced by his successors and his commands cease to be binding unless the successor reaffirms them. Even Albert, who wrote the Carmelite Rule, did not include absolute commands in the rule. It’s a highly theological and spiritual document. The General Chapter is the highest Carmelite authority, not Albert. This means that the Prior General has the authority to impose and implement whatever the General Chapter decides. It’s the same for the SOLT.
Because the SOLT is a society of apostolic life of diocesan right, the founder does not have perpetual authority. His successor can make changes. The General Chapter can make changes and the Bishop of Corpus Christi must approve. In a religious order or a congregation of Pontifical Right, it is the Holy See that must approve of changes in the statutes that govern them.
Whether or not the bishop and the superior like Father Corapi, it’s a tough situation. The Church is on their side. It falls on Father Corapi to appeal. However, I’m having trouble imagining any judge feeling sympathetic to a person who broadcasts that the Church’s legal system is flawed and calls them Kangaroo Courts or some such thing all over the internet.
I can also understand the superior of the SOLT. He has to protect the good name of his society. It is one thing for a member to leave and another for a member to get everyone angry at them.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
