It was not my intention to comment on this memo that was released by Santa Cruz media in defense of Fr. John Corapi. I was frankly happy to see passions abating from previous posts on the subject, and earlier in the week I had decided that, until something was “known” I would not post any further on Corapi.
Then the memo was released on Friday, and I thought, “oh, blerg! Not more!” I really didn’t want to open up another round of conjecture and speculation based on a memo that I thought raised as many questions as it seemed, for some, to answer. None of us knows any more than we did last week, when Corapi said, himself, that the allegations originated from a former employee, so it seemed pointless to comment on. And unlike a few inquiring email correspondents, I didn’t find the thing to be “proof” of anything much, and some of it bothered me. That being the case, I thought discretion would be the better part of valor, for all concerned, and that I’d take a pass on the memo.
Also, I figured Deacon Greg, that old newshound, basically had it covered.
Discretion would be a little bit easier, though, if Fr. Corapi — who was the one who announced this whole mess to begin with — could pipe down and just let this thing play out. Instead he puts the memo on his site — not on the Santa Cruz Media site (there doesn’t seem to be one) but on his site, and the thing immediately invites questions. Why is the first line of the memo about the “intellectual property” of Corpai’s work, as though it was making a public notice against a claim? Why was the VP of operations writing this, not the CEO; why does it begin by declaring itself a wholly secular, for-profit interest, making a point that it answers to no Catholic authority, and then commence holding forth in what struck me as the downright Corapian language of a religious firebrand?Santa Cruz Media is a small company that handles all of Fr. Corapi’s multimedia product – it makes sense that they will want to protect their interests and their sales revenues. But I think a better memo would have been a simple declaration, something like “we support Fr. Corapi in this difficult time and pray for all concerned,” and then lead into their paragraph about appreciating their customer’s business.
But I think Santa Cruz Media should have said nothing at all. All that statement did was make people wonder why the CEO hadn’t written it. And a quick google search gave the answer:
At the urging of some readers, I did a little Googling to try and find out more information about Santa Cruz Media, Inc. According to this filing from the Whitefish Montana Election Commission, where the company is headquartered, the CEO of Santa Cruz Media is listed as John Corapi.
So, now I’m confused, and I am hoping someone can help me out, here. Is Fr. Corapi still a religious vowed to poverty, or is he a Diocesan priests who is entitled to own property? Does anyone know? I thought he was a religious? A commenter suggested that perhaps Corapi turned his venture over to secular management, as Mother Angelica did with EWTN, to keep her endeavor free-handed, but EWTN remains a not-for-profit organization, so this is not the same.
Like I said, this memo was better left unwritten. It certainly does nothing to hurt Fr. Corapi pursuant to the allegations he’s fighting, but it just muddies up the waters.
But who knows, perhaps it will help clear them.
The angel stirred the waters at Bethesda, and it brought healing. Perhaps all these stirred waters will bring healing to our beleaguered church and — please God — our much put-upon priests.
I say, let’s pray. I’m going to be offline and traveling for part of the day — a good chance to say rosaries for all concerned.