Corapi update: EWTN slams "shrill and uncharitable" attacks

Every Friday, it seems, there’s another significant  statement released in the ongoing story of Fr. Corapi — and this Friday was no different.

Late today, EWTN came out in defense of its decision to pull all of the priest’s programming.

Details, from the station’s website:

The Eternal Word Television Network said its decision to halt programming by the popular speaker Fr. John Corapi followed the lead of legitimate Church authority.

“EWTN has an obligation to uphold the discipline and teachings of the Church,” president Michael Warsaw said on April 1. “In the network’s thirty years of existence, our practice has always been to discontinue airing programs featuring any cleric whose priestly faculties have been suspended, even if temporarily,” Warsaw said.

EWTN pulled Fr. Corapi’s programs following the priest’s announcement on Ash Wednesday that he has been publicly accused of drug abuse and sexual relationships with several women. Fr. Corapi has denied the allegations.

In the weeks since then, EWTN has come under intense criticism for its decision.

In his statement, Warsaw said that much of that criticism has been “shrill and uncharitable.” He said that many people have threatened to withhold donations and have made personal remarks attacking the network’s employees.

“When I see messages and web postings that malign the character and intentions of people who have served this mission for years, often at great personal sacrifice, I cannot allow those assertions to stand unanswered,” he said.

Warsaw stressed that it “is simply illogical to assert, as some have, that the very people who have worked personally with Fr. John over the years and who have made certain that he has had a continued presence on EWTN would suddenly and immediately take league with the enemy and turn against him.”

Check out the rest.

Photo by: Patrick Novecosky


  1. Fiergenholt says:

    I must be missing something very significant here . . .OR EWTN has changed their policies in recent years.

    I can accept EWTN’s explanation on removing Fr. Corapi’s programs from their broadcasting schedule. If there is a ruling by the Bishops of the Church which disciplines a member of their staff (or their commentator pool), that discipline should be respected by a broadcaster that claims church affiliation and caters to a large Roman Catholic audience. That policy seems to be what is being followed here. Fr. Corapi was disciplined by his order; that discipline was ratified by the local bishop; Fr. Corapi is off the air. Period!

    Why, then, some years back, was that same policy not followed when Mother Angelica publicly insulted Cardinal McIntyre on the air ? Was that policy not in place then? Did Bishop Baker finally “lower-the-boom” on EWTN when he took over that diocese?


  2. Fiergenholt:

    Wasn’t it Cardinal Mahoney?

  3. Fiergenholt says:

    HMS: My apologies. It was Cardinal Mahoney. It’s Friday night and I’ve had a long week.

  4. The obvious answer to that question is that at the time, Mother Angelica ran EWTN and did as she pleased. It was after she handed over the control of the network to a secular board that this policy was put in place, and yes, they have enforced it with all other priests who lost their faculties, including Fr. Francis Mary. Fr. Corapi is persecuted or treated unfairly. He’s being treated like everyone else, and there is nothing wrong with that. None of this would be such a big deal if Fr. Corapi had not spoken out.

  5. The Vatican sided with Mother Angelica, that’s why. Disgusting that this issue is now being used to attack that heroic christian.

  6. “A priest,” the network CEO noted, “has no right to public ministry in the Church on his own. He cannot function publicly without the express permission of his bishop or religious superior. That is the discipline of the Church.”

    I think that is really the bottom line here. Part of the promises made at ordination is to obey legitimate superiors. That doesn’t mean to obey when you agree and it doesn’t apply if you disagree. There are lots of Catholics who “do their own thing” with respect to their religion — they are called “laypeople.”

  7. Seems like EWTN and the Bishops made a decision and those who listen to and support EWTN are also make their decision. Not sure why this is an issue. The station had to know when they pulled the programs that they were going to catch hell from their viewership and pay a heavy price.

    I am not sure why they could not have run previous taped programs from a time before the banishment was put in place. After all, he has not been found guilty of anything at this point unless I missed something. What he preaches is in direct agreement at all times with the authentic teaching of the church so his words would not cause concern. I can agree that putting him on live would be a problem because he might say something which gave concern.

    As to the attack on Mother Angelica and her run in with the far left liberal Cardinal Mahoney that issue was resolved long ago and Mother was right in her claims. She was indeed supported by the Church who also knew she was right.

    But confused on why this is news when it should have been obvious to anyone who knows the station and those who support EWTN. If he is found guilty of serious crimes against humanity such as abuse of children, then removal would have been supported. I think we just let a women religious back into the fold who had gone out and became a priestess when she apologized. That was certainly a direct attack on the Church and the Pope and against settled teaching that will remain so for all time.

    I also note that open dissenters to settled teaching routinely appear on the pages of so called Catholic meetings, TV and Radio, and in Catholic print newspapers. Why is it they can be allowed to remain in the public eye while in open dissent.

  8. brother jeff says:

    Greta, agree completely. You should start your own blog

  9. I think this statement gave some pause and fodder, especially those that over analyze, a trait I try to fight but sometimes lose…

    “Fr. Corapi’s religious superior obviously believes that this was the prudent and appropriate course of action.”

    Warsaw said that although the network does not know the details of the case, “as Catholics, we are obliged to give deference and the benefit of the doubt to the religious superior who does know.”

    Some reading, “they know more than we do” makes you think the worst…if you are inclined that way.
    I would hate to think if I wrote a letter about our pastor, a nice priest who handles 2 co-joined churches, he would still be there next week…it seems like such overkill without abuse, but again, we aren’t supposed to know anything.
    I pray I stop caring…confession and church today.

  10. Some years ago Msgr Eugene Clark was accused of impropriety. EWTN immediately pulled his programs off the air as they did with Fr Francis Mary Stone afew years later. Pulling Fr Corapi off the air is simply following their policy as they should.

  11. The ‘shrill’ members of Corapi’s fan base now are taking on the trappings of a cult of personality where worship of a man is more important than their own religion. Now they are reduced to complaining that EWTN is in league with devil too.

    “In his statement, Warsaw said that much of that criticism has been “shrill and uncharitable.” He said that many people have threatened to withhold donations and have made personal remarks attacking the network’s employees.”

    One can only imagine what these Catholics are saying and writing. Sadly, they can not see the hypocrisy.

  12. Now, we see that Corapi followers have attacked:

    1) The alleged victim without knowing the facts of the case.
    2) The Bishop William M. Mulvey of Corpus Christi
    3) Father Gerard Sheehan, regional priest servant for the SOLT society
    4) The Dallas Charter
    5) EWTN

    It seems the Devil has done his work in causing harm to the church. Corpai followers see Bishops, Canon Law, Priests, religious orders, and Catholic publications as being oppressors now.

  13. Donal Mahoney says:

    I am among those who admire Father Corapi tremendously. I owe him a great deal in terms of my life in the Church today. Nevertheless, EWTN did the right thing. All things considered, I don’t see how the station could have done otherwise.

  14. Gabrielle says:

    I am still giving, did this morning, EWTN brings so many good things to so many people.

    What you don’t understand, doesn’t make it wrong.

    I agree the attacks have been plenty and some even ranting they wanted the woman (or women’s) names? Can you imagine…why would they want that, to harass her and make her say it’s all lies? What if it isn’t, is she demonized for tarnishing someone you love? Charity and patience is needed but hating a company or person, tarnishing even a person without a name yet, is not charitable either.

    She is not “wrong” yet…remember that.

  15. Of course they could not have done otherwise. If they have an affirmed policy, and they have imposed that policy historically in all other circumstances without fail, to not do so in this case would expose them to serious civil litigation. It was their fiduciary responsibility to act in the manner in which they did. The whiners are inconsequential.

  16. brother jeff says:

    You mean if they continued to air taped programs someone would have sued EWTN? who pray tell would thar have been.

  17. Janet Kormish says:

    Let us all pray for Father John Corapi and for his accuser. How about praying a daily rosary for the intentions of Father John and for his accuser.

    Also, recall that Saint Padre Pio for two years was not allowed public contact with people. He suffered, but did not complain. He was being obedient to the pope, who was having him investigated at that time. When the truth was finally revealed, Padre Pio had his privileges restored. Let us pray that the truth will be revealed in this difficult situation, and that God will provide courage and strength to Father John Corapi as he undergoes this persecution.


  18. Charlotte says:

    Greta, EWTN didn’t pull his programs because they think he’s guilty of anything. They pulled his programs because his public ministry has been suspended by legitimate authority after a preliminary inquiry, pending the results of an investigation. Preaching is a public ministry, even if the programs are old. That’s not a judgment of guilt, which EWTN made clear.

  19. Chris Burns says:

    What is the name or names of the accusor? Why are we protecting them? Why is Father being punished? Why aren,t we supporting our priests more? When Father is cleared according to your specifications(I personally know he is innocent) Is that person/persons going to be punished for slander? You,re protecting the wrong people!! Shame on you Ewtn and Solt.

  20. brother jeff says:

    Hey George a bishop has just released a statement in support of father corapi. Is he anti-ewtn too? Lol

  21. It doesn’t do EWTN well to attack their viewership. The people generally have a better sense of fairness and decency than the bishops about these issues. So now those who have been fed well by Father Corapi are “shrill.”

    Well, perhaps they are a bit shrill, seeing that no priests had been appointed for over three weeks to investigate the matter. (Have they done so yet?) Perhaps the sense of decency and fair play of the people has been offended. Perhaps it’s their priests in general whom they love and are getting tired of seeing railroaded by false allegations that leave men forever tainted.

    Perhaps they are disgusted by the cowardice and corruption of the bishops that has produced extremes of injustice, first by covering for filthy priests, and then by destroying the good with the bad through the excesses of the Dallas Charter.

    Perhaps the people writing to EWTN are as filled with disgust as I am at watching an innocent man being expected to take a sudden departure from active ministry with no word about why he is doing so. (I say innocent because he ought to enjoy a presumption of innocence that bears the fruits of innocence.) Under such circumstances, and in this political climate, the tongue waggers immediately gin up the rumor mill. So the bishops and Corapi’s superiors come off as rather disingenuous when they claim that Corapi enjoys the presumption of innocence and has brought this attention upon himself, when they know damned well that a month of sudden, unexplained departure (and who knows how much longer until investigators are even appointed) is every bit as damning as Corapi’s being proactive.

    I agree with Greta, there is no reason why EWTN cannot play reruns until Corapi’s case is adjudicated.

    For as bad as all of this is for priests, I fear the day is not long off when the deacons will take their turn at the false allegation game. I shudder to think of men losing their secular jobs when their pictures and names are handed to the media by their diocese along with the allegations.

    This is as foul a mess as one can imagine, and at its root is cowardice masquerading as prudence where no criminal wrongdoing has been alleged.

  22. Gabrielle says:

    I agree, unless they know something we don’t. I will be very angry if this will be the policy for allegations that don’t include abuse, assault, things like that. A failure in morals or weakness in pain, doesn’t constitute erasing someone from your airways/TV, etc. No one knows the man off the podium or altar and if he is supposed to be perfect, they are asking too much.

    I will hold out any judgement because we as outsiders, very much outsiders, don’t know anything. We judge on reading a few scripted lines from one side and that’s it.

    When Fr. Francis left, he was very honest and still people read into his letter things I coudln’t see at all because they wanted it to see what they wanted to see..

    Maybe in their own way, they are protecting him from more scandal, at least with live appearances, but this may well end up one day, a great sermon or be part of a great autobiography. The worst, I’d rather not think about.

  23. Deacon Greg Kandra says:


    The quality and orthodoxy of Fr. Corapi’s preaching are irrelevant. His faculties have been suspended. So he cannot preach, or present himself as a priest. That is why EWTN had to remove him from the air. To do otherwise would, in effect, give a forum for him to do both (albeit in a taped form) and muddy the waters — and, as others have noted, it would be inconsistent with what the network has done for other priests in similar circumstances.

    Dcn. G.

  24. @ Gerard Nadal

    What if Father Corapi is found to be a ‘filthy priest’, your description, and his whole ministry has been based on lies and hypocrisy as result of the investigation?

    Will you apologize for attacking the church?

  25. @ brother jeff

    You realize that Bishop is Father Corapi’s personal friend, right? Not a disinterested party but someone with skin in the game or course he is going to stand up for his friend and try to interfere.

  26. TerenceBranigan says:

    So how long will it take for the the matter to be decided? Does anyone know?and if so will you let us know please.
    In the meanwhile we can see Fr Corapi on you tube, and hear his words of wisdom there.
    Satan and his company must be breathing a great sigh of relief at having silenced the best Roman Catholic Preacher in the Church.
    Pope Benedict your best Priest needs help, do come to his aid
    as soon as possible

  27. Deacon Greg Kandra says:

    Re the retired bishop’s statement:

    He criticizes the fact that the accused priest’s name has been released.

    But, in the Corapi case, who was the one responsible for that?

  28. George,

    If Corapi is found to be filthy it changes nothing, and I will not apologize. The reason is simple:

    HOW we get there matters. That some men may be filthy does not mean we subject all men to public humiliation and suspicion. If the charges cannot be substantiated, it does not mean the man is innocent. It means simply that the charges cannot be substantiated.

    If the woman recants, does it mean that Corapi is truly innocent, or that she has been threatened by fanatical supporters? Might she be weary of being ostracized in her family or community? Might someone have paid her off? How will we ever know?

    I worked with homeless teens for years, many of whom made allegations against their fathers and mother’s boyfriends. As a mandated reporter, I was obligated to call the state. Often the kid would recant. The problem was that we never knew if the retraction was based on fear, coercion, or genuine conscience for a genuine false allegation. It didn’t matter. The accused’s life was forever altered, guilty or not.

    Corapi was not accused of a crime with a child or adult. He deserves the presumption of innocence which carries with it very highest safeguarding of his good name. If he’s guilty, it ought not change how we treat the next cleric should an allegation of a similar sort be lodged against him.

    It isn’t disrespectful to point out injustice.

  29. Deacon Greg,

    Can you understand that Corapi was placed in the position of people engaging in rumors and scandalmongering if he went suddenly, quietly, and mysteriously? Do you not grasp this?

    The choice was to go quietly and create a vacuum into which rumors would be sucked, or proactively get out in front of the story and allow people to know what he is facing.

    Assuming his innocence, neither is very attractive. That said, I fail to see where you criticize him for being responsible for the release of his own name, when the alternative would have been as effectively devastating, if not moreso.

    [Gerard: There's no way getting around the fact that Fr. Corapi's name would have to be made public, one way or another. So I don't understand, then, why this bishop is making an issue of it. How else would it be done? Dcn. G.]

  30. Jim Dotter says:

    For everyone asking how long will this take:


    ( descending from the soap box )

  31. “Greta…

    The quality and orthodoxy of Fr. Corapi’s preaching are irrelevant. His faculties have been suspended. So he cannot preach, or present himself as a priest. That is why EWTN had to remove him from the air. To do otherwise would, in effect, give a forum for him to do both (albeit in a taped form) and muddy the waters — and, as others have noted, it would be inconsistent with what the network has done for other priests in similar circumstances.

    Dcn. G.”

    I do not agree. From everything I can find on this issue, the stipulation is one that says that you cannot in person present yourself as a priest or preach until the matter is resolved. I would assume that this would be the case because you could begin making a public argument about the issue. If taped shows are shown, they would in no way have anything to do with the issue and EWTN is simply showing these tapes. I think EWTN should have forced the issue demanding the bishops send them something in writing showing where they would have to stop showing tapes that happened before the charges and which had nothing to do with the charges. If the bishops did this, then they could simply post it and obey.

    Can you send me something that states that tapes by a priest cannot be shown?

    Also, I do not agree that the “orthodoxy of Fr. Corapi’s preaching are irrelevant” and in fact that is what most of his supporters believe to really be the issue. He has over time become a person who is very much the focus of a numer of the bishops because of the authentic and accurate teaching of The Catholic Church which puts them in focus for their spirit of Vatican II dissent. He mentioned a few times that he is aware of this concern and said if given the first opportunity, some who disagree would act.

    EWTN will lose which will also please those who want actual Church teaching to be stopped so they can bring in the clown mass, liturgical dancers, and folk music. You know this as well as anyone. That is why I said EWTN should not give in easily to this and put on his tapes and force the issue in writing. Make those who are not on the attack put in writing they must stop and then simply publish the letter laying the issue where it belongs.

  32. And some seem to be saying that what Father Corapi put out in explanation for suddenly going missing and to proclaim his innocence was the wrong move. Remember that he has had serious illness and if he simply disappeared, some might be inclined to talk about his appearnce changes as if he had some serious issues and was either back on drugs or dying of AIDS. He did what most normal people would do and that is proclaim their innocence loudly.

    Yet I detect some being upset with what he posted which begs the question of why the feel this way and if they would simply crawl away and hide if they felt they were falsely accused. I also see that some who seem to think he did wrong in his posting of the issue are also very offended if they are accused of even minor dissent in a comment.

  33. Great posts Greata and Gerald, thank you!

    Dcn. Greg of COURSE Father Corpai had to get out in front of it. For goodness sakes he had a MAJOR retreat in IL coming up with thousands of people within a week of his first statement. It was the responsible thing to do, despite the consequences. Also, had he NOT defended himself as he had every right to do, he risked scandalizing many.

    Speaking of consequences, the greatest to him,IMO, has been from the Catholic blogsophere, especially Patheos which has become the big and dogmatic, Corapi Echo Chamber. Yeah, call it “news”, but I call it whoring for hits, including Mr. “Starbucks” and his latest, “Ten things to do while we wait this out, or something.”

    If all of you who wait for the “next piece of Corapi news” would at LEAST turn off the comment section, maybe some of us could at least believe that you didn’t have a dog in the race.

    If you are still confused as to “what exactly” is wrong with your “news”, it’s this: TONE, and INNUENDOS, and of course, providing the platfrom for the demons to do their work. And this is all from a group that admitingly “hardly new him”, and/or almost or never mentioned him in their entire bloglife.

    I still ask a quesiton that is more or an eginma to me than Corapi’s innocence or guilt: How could you NOT have known him?

    Maybe if there is a lesson to be learned in all of this, it would be our “elite Catholic writers” who, for the most part with a few exceptions, appear to live in an elite Catholic Bubble, clueless to the needs of the starving flock . While most of you are keeping the echo chamber going, the “little sheep” have been tuning in to Father Corapi, who like or not, has been one of if not the biggest teacher and defender of the Truth of Jesus Christ (the Catechism), The Gospels, the Eucharist, The Blessed Mother, The Rosary, Spritual Warfare, and last but not least, the Divine Mercy of Jesus Christ. He was also one of the most vocal priests in the US on the defense of all human life.

    What hater of the Catholic Church/Faith wouldn’t WANT to take a priest like Father Corapi out?

    One thing is for sure, Satan won this battle, with the help of many who provided the forum for the divisions, Satan’s number one tactic.

    Like Gerald pointed out, the point isn’t the guilt or innocence of Father Corapi, and it certainly isn’t about the overused talking point of the “cult of personality.” It’s about the process and the distruction,detraction, and reputation of a priest before his “day in court.”

    Even if it turns out to the shock of many, that Father Corapi is proven guilty, where does that leave all of you who write on mercy?

    Lastly, one thing I now find interesting in thinking back of the many teachings of Father Corapi is the fact that he never “debated” the faith, with ANYONE, he simply taught it. Often times he would be asked why HE wasn’t the priest going on Larry King to answer the “How could a good God” let this natual disaster happen, etc. He made it very clear to us as students that he had only one purpose, and that was to CONFIRM US in our faith, so that WE could be the defenders of it.

    Perhaps more than ever, that day has now come.

  34. brother jeff says:

    But it is also an anti-corapi echo.chamber. a BISHOP releases a statement in support of Corapi and this site and anchoress IGNORE it. The agenda is very clear now.

    [Re: the "anti-corapi echo chamber". For what it is worth, since March 20, this blog has posted 14 items that mention Fr. Corapi. Seven were involving statements by either Fr. Corapi, his superiors, EWTN, or his media company -- all sympathetic to Fr. Corapi, and telling his side. Another post was devoted to a prayer for priests, suggesting it as a prayer for Fr. Corapi. Another directed people to a Facebook page, where readers could offer their support for him. Another post was linked to Gerard Nadel's sympathetic blog post on Fr. Corapi and "March Madness. Another linked to my column, which pointed out why the Corapi case matters to all of us. Notwithstanding the comments, which have been all over the map, Fr. Corapi has been treated more than fairly in these pages. Dcn. G.]

  35. Daniel T says:

    Bishop Gracida appeared to be making general commentary about the process on his own blog due to the controversy. It wound up on Father Corapi’s website. While the majority of the commentary is sandwiched between mentions of Father Corapi, it is talking in general and not specifically about Father Corapi.

    While he indicates that it may be an injustice to announce a suspension publicly, where does he say that it is an injustice to suspend the priest? He doesn’t. I’m also not sure what he might be suggested in a case where the accuser may be talking about a priest having consensual sex with someone other than the accuser. Do you publish all of the names of persons accused? Do you publish the name of the accuser if the accuser has not said anything about having had consensual sex with the accused priest, only that he had consensual sex with others?

    When in his final remarks the bishop “such is reported to have been the case of the accusation against Father Corapi”, it seems he may not have any additional information than most of us about the actual case. Rather, he knows that Santa Cruz Media has reported on how they see the motive of accuser; it doesn’t seem to me there is any indication he has read the letter of accusation nor interviewed the accuser.

  36. These truly are sad times. Seems the devil gets his way no matter what we do.

  37. I believe Fr. Corapi would be the first to say that EWTN is doing the Lord’s will. Yes, doing the Lord’s will. There is nothing that comes from the blessed media apostolate that is not in line with God’s holy will and the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Our Merciful Father will bring good out of this suffering to all who are enduring this trial. Fr. Corapi, EWTN, spiritual friends of Father and EWTN, and those of us who hold up this network as a true work of Divine Providence. Peace

  38. Let us all remember that when we see Our Lord crucified on the Cross, every sin ( including the false accusation made by the accuser) was part of what Our Lord suffered from Adam and Eve until the last day on this earth. This difficult time is all part of what Our Lord endured for us all.

    Let us continue to pray for Fr. Corapi, the Church and the world during this Holy time of Lent. In the end, God will reign!

  39. @ Mary

    Your quote: “including the false accusation made by the accuser”. No one is going to take your seriously with a post like that. Unless you really know what went on and are part of the investigation, you really are just guessing and pre-judging the accusers claims without a shred of facts. It would be shameful if the accused is telling the truth and ignored her simply because you are a fan of Corapi.

  40. Gabrielle says:

    Yes, George, that is not fair to the women…it’s like people want to stone her for saying anything bad about their favorite priest. He’s not Christ, was just trying to be his priest on earth. NO ONE knows him, no one knows the people involved. How cruel to demonize strangers, pray they repent, when maybe they didn’t do anything wrong.

    How many people were fooled by their priests and ministers? Let them do what they have to do..but please, he’s innocent until proven otherwise but so are the accusers!

  41. brother jeff says:

    When is the blog post about the bishop’s statement decrying media exploitation of this matter coming? It has been posted on Father Corapi’s site. I am waiting with baited breath.

  42. EWTN acted correctly. Fr. Corapi’s accuser has not. Be patient, her story is already leaking. She has a troubled past that Fr. Corapi attempted to heal. She has contradicted herself and her unfounded case is beginning to implode.

    Keep praying for the truth to be made public.

  43. George, I’ll tell you why I can call this woman a “false accuser”.
    “A tree is known by its fruit”. Anyone who has listened to Fr Corapi over the years knows the character of this man. Tell me he got into a fist fight…I would possibly believe it. Tell me he put somebody in their place verbally….I would believe it! Tell me he went up against an issue to right a wrong…I would believe it. But tell me, when faced with an accusation that is true and he looked in the faces of the Bishops and lied! No way! It is not his style even remotely. If the Bishops confronted him and he HAD done what was said, I believe 100% Fr Corapi would have admitted it and taken his licks. He is a no-nonsense man. period!

  44. Daniel T says:

    Brother Jeff:

    The bishop’s statement (that seems to have been written for his own blog) doesn’t actually decry media exploitation of this matter at all. He questions whether a public announcement of a suspension is necessary in some cases. I don’t see him questioning that a suspension is appropriate. Once suspended (which the bishop doesn’t seem to challenge), the public announcement seems to have mainly come from Father Corapi. Father may have felt that he had no choice as it would be necessary for him to cancel speaking engagements. If the bishop were questioning whether a suspension was appropriate in these circumstances, then perhaps he should say so.

  45. Deacon Greg, First of all, thanks for your RULES for the ROAD, and for myself, I believe that you have an EXCELLENT THINK TANK, with your discernment regarding our expatiating on the exuberance of our verbosity — ME tends to have been (GIFTED?) with a negative sense of humor, and needed those RULES for the ROAD — makes for a good examination of CONSCIENCE — and I also appreciated your WISDOM regarding what is an important factor — Father CORAPI was teaching the CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH — IMPORTANT?

    In Christ, and HIS GREAT MOM,
    (mom of a SOLT PRIEST)

  46. I hope it’s a full investigation including lie-detector test for both parties. Let’s nip this thing in the bud and get on with the Gospel of Truth.

    Since it sounds like he’s not accused of breaking any civil laws, only moral ones, unfortunately it would make the case difficult for the accused. I haven’t the faintest idea how one would go about determining who, if any, is telling the truth in a case like this and know that it is in fact the truth, and not someone being “bought” to say something either way. That’s why I mentioned the polygraph above. I think hiring a known professional administer of the test could come in and within a day or two tops know without much doubt who’s lying and who’s truthing (my word).

  47. brother jeff says:

    Polygraphs can result in false positives. Yoi can also defeat them that is why they are not admissible in court.

  48. As a few of you have stated: The Devil has won…..well, let me clarify…………..the Devil has most likely won a battle here, but he certainly has not won the war. I don’t think anyone needs a reminder of who really wins in the end! We all know who wins in the end!

  49. It is tragic that one person can cause some much damage to a priest that has done so much for so many. Fr. Corapi is a strong champion of the faith and is reacting as we would if we were falsely accused. That being said it is necessary for the Church to respond with all accusations (merited or not) with a firm and even hand. In the non-catholic word even the hint of impropriety leads to immediate guilt. As wrong as this is, it is the house that we have built. Good men and good women have, are, and will suffer because of this. We will not restore credibility with many despite all our efforts and actions. However that does not relieve us of the burden of reacting in what many consider a severe manner. We hold ourselves to be a light to the world and even the hint of impropriety has to be address. It is tragic and I am sure Fr. Corapi is suffering as we his loyal fans are suffering. We must take solace in the words of our savior and know as the world persecuted him they will persecute us. We must find the strength, take the highroad and pray for those who persecute us. It is hard, it is difficult, but is part of the cross that Christ gave us.

  50. Elizabeth Scalia says:


    “Brother Jeff” (or “Jeff) #34 writes:

    “But it is also an anti-corapi echo.chamber. a BISHOP releases a statement in support of Corapi and this site and anchoress IGNORE it. The agenda is very clear now.”

    An “anti-Corapi echo chamber” and “…the agenda is very clear, now”?

    Downright paranoid.

    I linked to that statement here, while noting:

    “Meanwhile, Fr. Corapi’s website has added this memo to his site, but has said nothing about this controversy brewing at EWTN, either way. I wouldn’t presume to speak for him, but I can’t imagine likes seeing his friends at EWTN being treated badly or punished over a matter that they really don’t have much control over.”

    The fact is, the Bishop’s statement added nothing “new” to the story at all, but it was linked to. In fact the only reason I even linked to the EWTN statement (and I will bet this is also true for Deacon Greg) is because the comments threads were full of “I don’t understand why EWTN can’t…” and so it was relevant.

    But only just.

    Also, EWTN did the right thing in being consistent. A policy is a policy and a rule is a rule and if it applies to other priests, it should apply to Fr. Corapi, too. Unless rules only apply when we want them to? Is that the new standard?

    As long as I am over here commenting, I gotta say something:

    Greta or Klaire I’m not sure which one of you said the Deacon should “close comments” whenever he links to a Corapi tidbit and accused him of malice because he did not do so.

    It seems to me that no matter what Deacon does, you’ll damn him for it. If he had closed the threads, you and others would have accused him of “not allowing Father Corapi to be defended.” I expect you’d be like Jeff trying to imply that Deacon Greg (and I) tried to “hide” demonstrations of support for Father Corapi.

    In fact, I recall when Deacon DID close a thread that was out-of-control, that some of you — Jeff, I remember you, specifically — ran over to my comments threads to denounce the Deacon for closing the comments threads where — after hundreds of comments — your furious defense of Fr. Corapi had not yet been spend.

    So, threads open, we’re trying to destroy Fr. Corapi; threads closed, we’re trying to destroy Corapi.

    Nice work.

  51. brother jeff says:

    No i actually called for the closing of comments because Corapi’s detractors were out of control, including implying his guilt because fr euteneur spoke with hime once at a conference and otherwise making fun of his tan and beard. Here and on your otherwise excellent website. In any case, the fact is that the bishop’s statement did not generate ‘headline news’ like the other statements, it was merely linked to. Why the different treatment.

  52. Elizabeth S., what do you make of the fury of the “defenders of Corapi”? It’s scary and very puzzling to me. Do these people love and idolize him more than Jesus? Not good. Would they leave the Catholic Church if Corapi decided to I wonder?


  53. It does not matter if Corapi slept with a child or an adult woman when it comes to discipline. They are both big crimes.

    “Under a 1993 state law, it’s a felony for any clergy member to have sex with another adult who is seeking or receiving “religious or spiritual advice, aid, or comfort in private.””

    Priests are viewed as counselors and are held to higher standard when engaging in sexual relations with their flock due to the sway they can have the victim.

    Consider the case of Rev. Christopher Wenthe:

    Priest argues sex with woman was consensual

  54. Elizabeth Scalia says:

    #49, brother jeff, you’re right, it was not you, it was someone named “Thomas” who came into my threads complaining because Deacon Greg had closed his threads. Since it’s impossible to please everyone, I tend to keep my threads open until they close automatically. “Why the different treatment?”

    Because, as I said, the bishop’s statement was actually irrelevant to the story; it gave no new news, it didn’t even bring clarity to the situation as EWTN’s statement attempted to do. It mused on the Dallas specs which are not really relevant to Fr. Corapi’s situation as no matter what the issue is, we know he did not do anything shameful with minors or otherwise illegal.

    But I still acknowledged that Corapi had added it, and I think Deacon Greg and I have gone out of our way to be balanced, because we do not KNOW anything. No one does. People can “feel” anything in their guts or hearts but that is still not knowing. And THAT is all we have ever said: we don’t KNOW. I’ll write more about this at my own blog.

  55. Elizabeth Scalia says:

    Forgot to add, Jeff, my apologies for misidentifying you. And one more thing about closing threads, Greta or Klaire — it would be a lot easier to shut down comments, or to “ban” people who make incredibly rude accusations about agendas and “anti-Corapi” forces or who accuse us of trying to tear down a priest or who make sly remarks about what sort of Catholics we must be simply because, while generally quite positive about Fr. Corapi (I have several times posted his videos at my blog) we were not enthralled to the point of hero-worship of the guy.

    More at my place, later.

  56. Jeff:
    I and others who post here at the Deacon’s Bench have no “ax to grind” about Fr. Corapi. We want to be fair about the issue. I have observed the comments over the past days. No one has posted any outrageous judgment about Fr. Corapi; they have just seen “red flags’ about him.

    As for the Deacon, I find that he adheres to the highest of journalist ethics. (How do I know about journalists? I have close relatives in the field.)

    I certainly wish that you would respect our legitimate concerns.

  57. Several people have said in their responses that the devil has won the battle. If we actually do believe this, then we’re playing right into his hands. The battle has only begun, folks! Put on the armor of Christ and stand fast!

  58. If Fr. Corapi’s faculties had not been removed and the accusations were handled privately, until the facts were known and innocence or guilt proven, he would not have had to make a statement. He has not been accused of child molestation or anything like that; as someone stated, he is accused of commiting a sin not a crime. When Archbishop Malingo was involved in a scandal that was true, a few years ago, he was not laicized. They had him stay at the vatican for a year or so and then he was back in public ministry. Later, he left again, of his own accord and that is when he was laicized. How they treated his transgressions makes more sense than the actions taken against Fr. Corapi.
    It is interesting that those who are being criticized for their actions or attiitude towards Fr. Corapi are very quick to defend themselves. Maybe that will help in understanding one of the reasons Fr. Corapi spoke up. It was an action in keeping with who he is. He has never denied his sins or that he, like anyone, is very susceptible to falling. He would be the first to admit it. If he were to disappear from public view without any explanation,would imply that he had something to hide.
    As to accusing the accuser, understand that someone is lying, and the accuser has something to gain by lying whereas Fr. Corapi if guilty , would have disappointed many but he would also know that the truth would set him free. He would perhaps lose of few who listened to his talks but the majority would have forgiven him and admire the fact that he was humble enough to be honest. We are all human and his faillings would not take away from the many years of living and preaching the truth.
    We all know that there are many, in all walks of life, that would want him and his preaching silenced. But I know it is going to backfire on them, because all of us who have listened to him and the few other priests who truly stand up for the truth, are witnesses to what he has always said, there is a war going on and we are living in a time of great darkness,and it is very dark indeed. So we must pray and pray unceasingly for all our priests who are increasingly under attack.

  59. The Rosary is the weapon. PRAY THE ROSARY – that is the advice Fr Corapi would be giving us today, in my humble opinion.

  60. Elizabeth, it’s an enigma to me that you still don’t seem to “get it.” Speaking only for myself, the only thing I am “defending” is TRUTH, not Father Corapi per se.

    Your POV results in clueless readers like Kathryn who appear like deer in the headlights. What part of truth exactly don’t you understand?

    As I posted earlier, Father Corapi could go down (or up) in flames and it wouldn’t change a thing about the Truth of Jesus Christ which he tirelessly taught to me and many others.

    It’s the tone that Patheos bloggers (as well as a few others that I thought very highly of, are using which is obviously disrespectful. You guys pick apart every word when the reality is, you don’t know Father Corapi like those of us who have listened to him for years. If you did, you wouldn’t blow up every little nuance that you think might be the “gottcha.” Would you all be doing the same if it was Pope Benedict who was the accused? Would we be also accused of “hero worship” becasue of our gratitude of what he has taught us?

    Again, I really do respect you Elizabeth and Dcn. Greg, but I simply remain in awe of how you have handled the Corapi news. I just don’t think you have given due respect to a priest that deserves AT LEAST that much, guilty or innocent. How respect equates to “hero worship” is mind boggling to me, really.

  61. p.s.

    I DO agree with you guys on EWTN’s decision. I also agree that Father Corapi would agree, as there is no other option. Obedience is everything.

  62. Dear Deacon Greg,

    Thanks for taking on such a tough subject. I love Fr. Corapi, I have watched him for years and I have some of his DVD’s. Fr. Corapi is very explicit in his conversion story, he tells a story of his life full of sin and vice. If we love Fr. Carapi properly we want his name cleared properly.

    Joe Fromm

  63. Klaire, I think you are crediting Elizabeth Scalia and Deacon Greg with more influence than they have. If all of Father Corapi’s most outspoken supporters, in all the comments I have read here and elsewhere, have not persuaded me that Father Corapi is unquestionably innocent and that his accuser is in league with the devil, how would two mere bloggers have succeeded, even if they had tried?

    It’s some of Father Corapi’s supporters–not Scalia or Kandra–that are causing me to wonder about his ministry.

  64. brother jeff says:

    Yes Kathryn we worship him as God. Lol. This is getting beyond silly.

    What i think is rude is smearing his defenders as ‘ hero worshippers.’ And i have to stand by my opinion that the failure to give a bishop’s statement the same above the fold treatment as selected portions of the EWTN letter is very disappointing to say the least. That a bishop made the statement is news itself in my view. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

  65. Daniel T says:

    While many focus on the sex and drug charges that Father Corapi included in the ‘everything from’ accusations against him, the bishops and religious superior have indicated that he was accused of conduct unbecoming of a priest.

    If he is cleared of any charges related to sex and drugs, I still wonder who exactly grants him priestly faculties? Both the bishop from Helena where he lived and the one from Corpus Christi where SOLT is headquartered have indicated that he did not hold faculties with them. It doesn’t seem like SOLT can grant him any faculties outside of their own community, and he doesn’t live in community. Whereas he apparently does so do to an agreement with Father Flanagan that preceded SOLT becoming an Society of Apostolic Life (when they were only a private association of the faithful), it would seem he could not have had an agreement that he was granted faculties by SOLT at a time when they couldn’t grant faculties. It would seem back at that point, his faculties would have come from the Diocese of Corpus Christi. Since the diocese says he has no faculties with them, what faculties did he have since he began living outside of the community? If he has not had faculties while holding himself out as someone in good standing, that would be rather unbecoming of a priest. Hopefully he did, but no one has especially affirmed that, only that his faculties are currently suspended.

    While it’s true that Father Corapi is not under a “vow of poverty”, per canon law “Clerics are to foster simplicity of life and are to refrain from all things that have a semblance of vanity.” The particulars of his involvement with Santa Cruz Media, which has stated that they are not affiliated with the Catholic Church and not subject to obedience to a bishop or religious superior, seem highly suspect. How can he turn over all rights to his talks to a for-profit company (which by all appearances he is the owner and CEO of) which then claims it is not subject to the authority of the Church? SOLT’s religious superior even questioned what they meant by that statement. By obedience, he can’t give a talk in a Church but his media company is not subject to that obedience. Anyone that looks over the rules governing Societies of Apostolic Life or simply those governing clerics would have to scratch their head and wonder how it fits with Father Corapi’s situation. All of that could of course be corrected if Father is willing enough to do so.

  66. if the defenders of fr corapi strike some as ‘shrill’ it may be from desperation and fear. where are our shepherds ? i get no nourishment from my local bishop. the people are starving and who cares?the american bishops conference look like a gathering of career middle management beurocrats. they have lost sight of the fact they are Christ on earth. fr corapi gave us the truth of Christ and his church. that cannot be denied.i end with a prayer Holy Spirit guide this investigation swiftly in the service of truth and ignite a holy fire in our lukewarm bishops

  67. Deacon Greg:

    [Gerard: There's no way getting around the fact that Fr. Corapi's name would have to be made public, one way or another. So I don't understand, then, why this bishop is making an issue of it. How else would it be done? Dcn. G.]

    In the midst of this media maelstrom, I trust you understand that I am not suggesting that you are gunning for Father Corapi. In the strictest sense, while I have enjoyed his talks and been challenged by the relatively few I’ve seen, I’m not at all invested in a particular outcome, other than the truth being served.

    That said, again, I’m invested in the process, because HOW we get there matters. Along those lines, I’m not so sure that I’m in agreement that a public revelation was inevitable. If the man were accorded a genuine presumption of innocence and safeguarding of his good name, public revelation would only be necessary if a thorough investigation by ecclesial and secular investigators revealed evidence of wrongdoing.

    And, I agree with you that you have reported on the story with great equanimity, more than I have on my blog. I truly hope that Corapi is innocent, but I offer this to his most ardent supporters:

    I worked at Covenant House in Times Square for seven years during the 1980′s. Founder, Father Bruce Ritter, OFM was regarded as the Mother Theresa of America for his ministry to street kids. He was a demi-god. Then he was taped by a young man whom he brought up from Florida as a boy toy he housed at Covenant House. Other young men from years past stepped forward and Ritter went down in flames.

    It happens. I pray it isn’t true in Father Corapi’s case, but there certainly is precedent, and excoriating Deacon Greg and Elizabeth Scalia won’t change Corapi’s reality. We need to insist on a more fair and nuanced approach to allegations based on the type of allegation being made.

    Elizabeth Scalia,

    You’re right that no matter what is done with the threads, you’re damned either way.

  68. Elizabeth Scalia says:

    Heh. Thanks Gerard. I hope you don’t mean I’m damned forever! :-)

    Jeff, you wrote:

    “I have to stand by my opinion that the failure to give a bishop’s statement the same above the fold treatment as selected portions of the EWTN letter is very disappointing to say the least. That a bishop made the statement is news itself in my view. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.”

    But… what do you make of the fact that I didn’t even provide a link (gasp! not even a link!) to the statement of the Bishop of Helena, Wyoming, wherein he says Corapi is not his priest? Oh no! What am I hiding there? I must not want to show support for….ummm…wait…maybe it wasn’t newsworthy, so I didn’t link it.

    You can read anything you want into anything. But it seems to me sometimes you have to make a show of good faith and give people the benefit of a doubt when they say they think a link is sufficient or not. I mean, I give Corapi the benefit of a doubt. Who do you give one to?

  69. The most newsworthy thing about the bishop’s statement to me is the way general commentary from his personal blog was posted on the site as if it offered any defense of Father Corapi, which Jeff seems to believe. He was talking about making public statements about suspensions, and I see no argument on his part against making the suspension. Some would have you think that it said that Father Corapi should not have been suspended in this case, yet it says nothing like that. Whether he felt compelled by the circumstances or not, it was Father Corapi who seems to have first made public the suspension, so the bishop’s objection to a diocese or religious order giving public notice of a suspension does not apply. While others might make the argument that Father should not have been suspended yet, that is not what the bishop argues.

  70. Angela Sullivan says:

    I do not know whether it is right or wrong to pull Father John Corapi From the program schedule, I do however believe that he has been treated un-fairly. You are inocent till proven guilty. He is being treated guilty till proven inocent.
    I know nothing about canon law but it does not seem very credible of SOLT to suspend him without any evidence. he is not accused of a crime, but behaviour un- becoming of a Priest. I also believe Father John Corapi would not lie, he just doesn’t strike me as that type, I hope that SOLT is being up-front and does not have an agenda. I know that Father Corapi has been extremely effective with his mission of spreading the Gospel, I pray for Father and all involved, but I am sorry I do not see this women as a victim.

  71. Elizabeth 50 and 55, I have never talked about closing off comments that I can remember. It seems like if you are going to take the time to hit on something about someone, you would take the time to get the name and post.

    I also note that no one has said where it says that during time of suspension, that EWTN is not allowed to play old tapes from the priest. I still think EWTN made a mistake not pushing out tapes during this period unless they had written instructions from the Bishop not to do so and then it would have made sense to put out that written document.

    No one has explained why those in open dissent from settled church teching are allowed to run free and publish in so called Catholic media as they are clearly guilty by their own words and actions. I remember for example some of the pro women priestess folks on CNS and also on the national catholic distorter having free reign on this settled matter. I also see open dissent from the bishops in our universities which is not stopped. Is there something in writing that explains all of this as it is confusing to me and many others.

  72. brother jeff says:

    Daniel it is literally inpossible to read Bishop Gracida’s statement in the hyper-nuanced, bloodless manner you are urging. He says the process is flawed, points out that no minor is involved, and opens by referencing Father Corapi’s situation.

  73. Elizabeth Scalia says:

    You’re right, Greta, it was Klaire, not you. I should have gone back and checked again. As to the rest, you don’t really want to hear the answer, so it won’t make sense to you, but once more: Fr. Corapi, fairly or not, has had his priestly faculties suspended, and that means that even showing OLD videos depicting him as a priest would, be confusing to many and would be a false representation of his status. It’s like saying, “well, okay, Fr. Francis Mary left the priesthood, but everything he preached while he was a priest was true, so they should still show his old tapes.” No, they shouldn’t, because he is no longer able to represent himself or the church or its teaching with the authoritative voice of a priest.

    That’s all that’s about.

    And I can’t answer your question about open dissenters are allowed to “run free and publish.” That’s a question for your bishop! ;-)

  74. Gabrielle says:

    Gerald, I remember Fr. Ritter, my first disapointment in the church. He came to my church and talked and I gave my first money to charity from my part time job to his Covenent House. I don’t regret that, the charity was good, but the news later was horrbile. My mother’s friend refused to believe it, wrote letters and later, when it was undeniable, she still thought it was somehow wrong. I’m glad she didn’t live to see the scandals in the last 10 years, she was a very devout woman, but very, very trusting.

    I try not to judge a charity by who promotes it, I look into the charity itself. I go by my gut but know it could fail me.
    Anyone can preach well if they have that gift, livng the life is much harder and sin stains us all. I learned by the time I reached 50, you really don’t know someone, especially on TV, you know their persona, but look at the fruit and look at how they live their lives.

  75. Daniel T says:


    The bishop says “There is no need for a public announcement to be made that gives the name of the priest and the fact of the accusation and the suspension, and yet, all to often such a public announcement is made.” He ends his commentary with “The only safe way to guard against damaging the reputation of individual priests and the Catholic priesthood in general is to not publish the name of an accused priest until an investigation has proved beyond doubt the guilt of the priest.”

    I don’t see any argument about the suspension, it is focused on the public announcement. In that regards, he feels that it is flawed. If he feels the flaw is in suspending a priest, he could have said that.

    It seems very odd to me that some people would suspect the bishops or the religious order of perhaps having some agenda and are out to get Father.

  76. This whole situation creates a cloud of fears.

    Priest today are scared for the most part of the laity. Why are they scared? They can’t be seen alone with a man, women, or child. Where does that put them? Back in the corner alone…Exactly where Satan wants them to be. So it’s clear after seeing this go one with Corapi that most priests in the US thinking of being bold in speaking the truth are to be scared now because you might end up like Fr. Corapi. And its not just Corapi as an example its the whole scandals in general. Is it a wonder we never hear about sin anymore? Next, we look at us lay people. We don’t want to trust anyone because it seems everyone is a hypocrite. Everyone points the finger at each other and we certainly don’t trust priests as much as we used to….Exactly what Satan wants….

    Master of confusion. Master of Lies. Master of scandals in the Catholic Church. Pray….

  77. Veronica says:

    Gabrielle, I can relate to your post (#74) re: Fr. Ritter. One of the attorneys that I was working for at the time received a donation letter from Fr. Ritter and Covenant House. This attorney (who was Jewish by the way) asked me what I knew about Covenant House and if he should send a donation. I proceeded to extol the virtues of Fr. Ritter and the good done by Covenant House. A few weeks later, the news came out about him.

    I leave it to your imagination as to how I felt.

  78. Gabrielle says:

    Veronica, I know, especially the first time, it’s this denial/sick to the stomach feeling. Later, sadly, it almost gets like a weird type of normal, you just sigh and feel momentarily deflated.
    I know priests hate all the”hands off”policy’s now but they have only their brothers to blame. So many have been charged, admitted guilt or have been arrested. It’s all over the world too, not just the US. NO job, in any area, lives in a bubble, people know, other priests know, they hear things, see things, they only have their silience to blame. Like any fraternity, they protect each other, they protect their names, their parish’s and I don’t know if they ever thought, even with the world not being afraid to say “sex” outside the home, it would blow up like this.
    Their has always been a deep shame with child abuse of any kind, but with support, many find the strength to face it.
    Any person who abuses, a parent, coach, teacher, etc. is awful beyond comprehension, but to have a trusted religious, someone your parents told you was “safe” and “you should listen to him” is beyond what any child or young adult should have to face.

    I know how my aunt was shocked her priest of many years was indicted and now with so few priests, I don’t know if it’s worse because they can’t afford to lose any, or better.

    I just pray for the ones left to carry the burdon of their brother’s and to try to understand how anyone could turn a blind eye to such a horrible thing.

  79. Richard W Comerford says:


    Re: Criticizing the Critics

    In 2002 our American Bishops instituted the Dallas Charter. They assured the faithful that the problem of predatory priests had been solved. However questions were immediately raised (by among others Cardinal Avery Dulles) regarding an alleged lack of justice in the Dallas Charter for accused priests. There were also questions as to how effective the Charter would prove against deeply embedded predatory priests. These questions have proven prophetic.

    The Corapi case comes on the heels of a Philadelphia Grand Jury finding that some 37 predatory priest were still active in that Archdiocese. The Cardinal, after initially expressing disbelief, has so far suspended 21 priests. According to news reports the only reason the former and now retired Cardinal was not indicted for cover up was his age.

    I suggest to you that much of the emotion stirred up by the Corapi case is based on the revelations that for almost 50-years the American Catholic Church bureaucracy has been been protecting; and in some cases promoting, predatory priests; while abandoning innocent priests and that nine years after Dallas still cannot get it right.

    Now let us assume that Corapi with his satanic priest look-a-like suntan, goatee and bald head is guilty. Even then Corapi deserves justice and the due process laid out for him in Canon Law. The real story here is that nine years after Dallas the Corapi case (and the case of other priests) is not receiving due process; and the problem of predatory priests is still very much with us. Under these circumstances emotions from the faithful are understandable.

    You, the anchoress, and even my hero the great Mark Shea have publicly come down against the satanic priest look-a-like Corapi and on the side of the Church bureaucrats. I respectfully suggest that the professional Catholic bloggers need to take a very neutral stance regarding the Corapi case, and stop complaining about the expressed emotions of very some battered faithful. Instead you very gifted folks should concentrate on the apparent failure of the Dallas Charter.

    God bless

    Richard W Comerford

  80. Karen Brown says:

    I totally agree with Mary, comment number 44. If Father Corapi were guilty he would man up to it!

  81. Couple of things, in no particular order:

    – I remember seeing Fr. Corapi (whose sermons I have long enjoyed, less the “social justice” wanderings), some months back on the internet, explaining his weight loss. It was then that I noticed that, not only had he lost weight, but he had taken to tanning AND trimming his grey beard to a slick goatee AND dying it dark, Just For Men, brown. Nothing sinful there to be sure, but a strange diversion toward simple vanity for a man with Fr. Corpapi’s story of “the world” and its snares and traps of of the ego and human affirmation. It concerned me a bit. Who was he trying to impress with his “new look”? Not the weight-loss (health reasons prevailed), but the careful attention given to the appearance of his face? Just struck me as odd for someone who had at one time apparently “conquered” the need to be pleasing to men (less the meaning of his spoken word as it pertained to the Church and the Gospel). The dye job and the tan, as shallow as it may seem, struck me as ALARMING for its sheer vanity. The need to tan and dye and wear some very expensive looking clericals, should have sounded alarms within the Father’s good heart, too. All is vanity, minus the glory of God. I can understand Tom Cruise NEEDING to stay “preserved” for his industry says it depends on Top Gun Tom looks, although his most recent big (only) success has been as fat, bald, gross Hollywood producer-persona, Les Grossman (Tropic Thunder). Maybe Fr. Corapi should take a page from Les Grossman’s book, as in “Les is more.”

    – Also, on Mother Angelica, she was “booted” off the air for indiscretions much more severe than simply “criticizing” Cardinal Mahoney (L.A…. Rex Grossman’s home, oddly). She was shelved for the enormity of daring to state her intention build EWTN’s Chapel “ad orientum” (to the East) according to Church dogma, with altar facing east toward Jerusalem. She also refused to have the Tabernacle hidden, but rather insisted on it dogmatic placement centrally behind the altar. She dared to resist the “non-dogmatic” novelties of the “pastoral” Second Vatican Council; novelties and “recommendations” that became de-facto “dogma.” She rejected them, correctly, and will some day be canonized for it. The last straw was when she declared on-air that she did not believe that ALL of the Third Secret of Fatima was revealed by Pope John Paul II. She was immediately yanked.

  82. God forbid Mother give an “opinion’…as I’ve always said, a woman with that much power over people and jobs, etc. no matter how holy, is still a threat to many men, but not all of course. She did SO much with the TV/Radio/Satalite, it boggles the mind and without the TV stations backup when she didn’t like who was on with her. Far from perfect, but everything she did was for Jesus, unlike many in our world today.

    I never found Fr. Corapi that engaging after the first few got old, I think in part, because everything he said, was fine, (well except for a few things) but it always sounded regurgitated, he never was challenged per se, never liked to talk much after the talks from what I hear, , question and answer, just signed books and was quiet. He didn’t live like he preached, if what was said above is true, for profit business, from what I read, flashy cars, bodyguards, nice trips, clothes. He liked to mention how educated he was a lot, his “tough guy” past, how he wanted to be alone, like a hermit, but his order thought he had a gift of preaching and he admitted in one talk, he agreed. The web site, DVD’s, etc. if they helped people, I’m glad, but it just made me uncomfortable and the grace, intense grace, that brought me back to the church, just didn’t lead me to him. I admit, his conversion story was the only things that held my interest, and I wondered if it was because it sounded like a Lifetime much drama. I believed his stories about Mary and the grace he received, but if it is ever brought out that he lied, it will hurt many, many people.
    I hope that all this is put to rest by the summer. I did learn more about him though, thorugh all the postings and pray for a good ending. If his conversion was a true one, not embellished, he wont be gone.

  83. This was my favorite part of a talk that he gave on confession..if it made anyone go, all the better.

  84. MaryPrayForUS says:

    It is amazing to me how this scandal has caused so much confusion.
    I understand that many of you hold Fr. Corapi in high regard.
    I think that it is very dangerous to defend anyone in this whole matter, as we do not know the truth.
    What if it is true that Fr. Corapi did all these things?
    The fact is we don’t know. Fr. Corapi is human, and he may have committed these acts! Let’s remember that he did come from a bad backround, and it wouldn’t be hard to fall right back into it.
    I think what we need to focus on is praying that the TRUTH will come out, and pray that both parties recieve healing.
    There is only one thing that I can be sure of, and that is someone is lying and some one is telling the truth.

  85. How very poor Father Corapi will be now. He has given away his rights to celebrate the Holy Mass.The greatest blessing a priest has, no other humanbeing has this privelage. His preaching was a gift from God, so was his priesthood.God has enabled Father corapi to help many people through this divine priesthood,we still remain thankful to God for these blessings.How lonely and empty Father corapi must feel away from his priesthood and fellow priests. As part of the mystical body of christ, which we all share in Holy Communion, I believe all sincere catholics(christians) have shared this pain of loss and shock as I have. I am sad to say I will not be following anymore of father Corapis talks on his website as I believe it will hinder his return to the priesthood. I hope genuine well wishers of father corapi will do likewise. As a layman I would rather see him taking time out for reflection and prayer. Jumping straight into a new websight seems as one person on this blogg said…… seems more about Father Corapi than God, I have to agree. Please continue to pray for him and for the bishops and EWTN and all concerned in this….. .. unholy mess. God bless you all.

Leave a Comment