a.) he was accused
b.) he was declared to be guilty
c.) he was never given an opportunity to reply to the accusations before he was declared to be guilty of the accusations.
d.) his ministry was set up to be exactly what it is – independent living as he served. But now, SOLT has changed their internal structure to be different than it had always been.
I don’t think this is an accurate rendering. For one thing, the investigative team was not charged with the responsibility of finding him “guilty” or not. Their function was to gather and assess evidence. They unearthed sufficient evidence for SOLT to determine he is not fit for ministry. They made no “declaration” of guilt.
He has been given “opportunity” from day one, and has consistently refuesed. Even with the publication by SOLT, they are still directing him to return to the community. He has refused to submit to the canonical process, and decided to throw in the towel instead.
SOLT has been trying to get him to move in since they were able to purchase a property in Texas for the headquarters. He has consistently refused. Living with the community would have made a duplicitious life much more difficult.
Sounds to me to be a very similar pattern to cases of perfectly innocent priests having been declared guilty of a particular something (crime) with only having been accused of that crime. Weeks and months and even years go by without their having a chance to defend themselves.
Yes. Sadly, this has happened.
Code:
Meanwhile, the Devil dances. With hardly any effort at all, he's taken out another priest. Remember -- the Devil is a LIAR.
One of his favorite places to whisper lies is into the ear of the priest.
Code:
Ya know.. people can accuse. And provide what THEY consider to be proof of whatever it is that they're accusing the person of having done. Then, the accused person is considered "guilty as charged."
As far as I can tell, you are the only one here classifying him as “guilty”. This is not a word that SOLT or his bishop used.
Code:
Without the accusers being investigated, themselves, to determine whether what they're saying should be considered to be true. Then - bang! The accused is deemed to be guilty.
Even if the accusations brought by the woman are found to be spurious, there are so many other problems that at this point, it is irrelevant. The most distressing is his refusal to submit to his authorities. Innocent or guilty, this needs to be done.
Code:
I think it's the case that SOLT's "management" themselves, has rolled over!!
So you think all those things they published were not their own findings? They took bribes from someone?
Frankly, I don’t know the all facts of the case for Fr. Corapi. All I know is what I read in the news of his having been accused and condemned of whatever it is. And what I read and hear/see him say, himself, on his Website. And I hear as announced by Raymond Arroyo on The World Over.
Corapi has not submitted to the process. Fair or not, it is his duty to participate in it.
Code:
I don't blame him at all for doing anything he CAN do to defend himself.
Is that what “turn the other cheek” is all about?