On Saturday, March 18th, 2011, Fr. Corapi stated on his website that he has been placed on administrative leave pending investigation of a claim by an adult female former employee that he has been in a relationship with her and other women and is a drug addict. He denies the allegations as false, the entire process as without justice:

On Ash Wednesday I learned that a former employee sent a three-page letter to several bishops accusing me of everything from drug addiction to multiple sexual exploits with her and several other adult women. There seems to no longer be the need for a complaint to be deemed “credible” in order for Church authorities to pull the trigger on the Church’s procedure, which was in recent years crafted to respond to cases of the sexual abuse of minors. I am not accused of that, but it seems, once again, that they now don’t have to deem the complaint to be credible or not, and it is being applied broadly to respond to all complaints. I have been placed on “administrative leave” as the result of this.

I’ll certainly cooperate with the process, but personally believe that it is seriously flawed, and is tantamount to treating the priest as guilty “just in case”, then through the process determining if he is innocent. The resultant damage to the accused is immediate, irreparable, and serious, especially for someone like myself, since I am so well known. I am not alone in this assessment, as multiple canon lawyers and civil and criminal attorneys have stated publicly that the procedure does grave damage to the accused from the outset, regardless of rhetoric denying this, and has little regard for any form of meaningful due process.

All of the allegations in the complaint are false, and I ask you to pray for all concerned.

From Fr. Corapi's web site:

A Call for Prayer
On Ash Wednesday I learned that a former employee sent a three-page letter to several bishops accusing me of everything from drug addiction to multiple sexual exploits with her and several other adult women. There seems to no longer be the need for a complaint to be deemed “credible” in order for Church authorities to pull the trigger on the Church’s procedure, which was in recent years crafted to respond to cases of the sexual abuse of minors. I am not accused of that, but it seems, once again, that they now don’t have to deem the complaint to be credible or not, and it is being applied broadly to respond to all complaints. I have been placed on "administrative leave" as the result of this.

I’ll certainly cooperate with the process, but personally believe that it is seriously flawed, and is tantamount to treating the priest as guilty “just in case”, then through the process determining if he is innocent. The resultant damage to the accused is immediate, irreparable, and serious, especially for someone like myself, since I am so well known. I am not alone in this assessment, as multiple canon lawyers and civil and criminal attorneys have stated publicly that the procedure does grave damage to the accused from the outset, regardless of rhetoric denying this, and has little regard for any form of meaningful due process.

All of the allegations in the complaint are false, and I ask you to pray for all concerned.

follow up:
Corpus Christi, Texas, Mar 21, 2011 / 05:58 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Popular speaker and author Fr. John Corapi has been placed on administrative leave by superiors within his religious order following recent allegations of misconduct.

Fr. Corapi said in a March 19 statement that a 3-page letter submitted by a former, unidentified female employee was entirely “false.” The letter claimed that the priest took part in sexual encounters with several adult women and engaged in habitual drug use.

Fr. Corapi – a member of Texas-based Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity – is an internationally-known speaker and author who has appeared regularly on Catholic television and radio programs.

He gained a widespread audience with his conversion story. After a prominent career as a wealthy businessman, his life spiraled out of control due to a cocaine addiction, eventually leading to him living on the streets. He later joined the Catholic Church and was ordained a priest.

On March 18, Fr. Gerry Sheehan, Regional Priest Servant for the society, issued a statement saying that Fr. Corapi had been placed “on administrative leave from priestly ministry, in accordance to the Code of Cannon Law of the Catholic Church.”

“We have an allegation that Father Corapi has behaved in a manner unbecoming of a priest and are duty-bound to conduct an investigation in this accusation.”

Fr. Sheehan said it was “important to keep in mind that this action in no way implies Fr. Corapi is guilty of the allegation.”

“It is equally important to know that, based on the information we have received thus far,” he added, “the claim of misconduct does not involve minors and does not arise to the (level) of criminal conduct.”

The broadcast of Fr. Corapi’s homilies and teachings is also being affected by the allegation. The Eternal Word Television Network issued a statement from its CEO Michael Warsaw on March 21. He said that the “troubling situation” will result in the suspension of the priest's radio and television shows until further notice.

“As a result of this evolving story EWTN has deemed it prudent to place Fr. John's TV and Radio programs 'on leave' as well, pending the resolution of this situation,” Warsaw said.

“We take this step reluctantly and hope for a speedy resolution,” he added, saying he joins “Fr. John in asking all our family to not only pray for him but for all who may be involved.”

The 63 year-old priest said that he was informed of the accusations, which were reportedly sent to numerous bishops by the former employee, on March 9.

“On Ash Wednesday I learned that a former employee sent a three-page letter to several bishops accusing me of everything from drug addiction to multiple sexual exploits with her and several other adult women,” he said.

Fr. Corapi – who has been an outspoken critic of bishops' zero-tolerance policy in the wake of sex abuse scandals involving minors within the Church – said that from his perspective, being placed on leave was an equally reactionary move.

“There seems to no longer be the need for a complaint to be deemed 'credible' in order for Church authorities to pull the trigger on the Church’s procedure,” he said on his website.

Although he is not being accused of misconduct related to minors, Fr. Corapi added that “it seems, once again, that they now don’t have to deem the complaint to be credible or not, and it is being applied broadly to respond to all complaints.”

“I’ll certainly cooperate with the process, but personally believe that it is seriously flawed, and is tantamount to treating the priest as guilty 'just in case,' then through the process determining if he is innocent.”

“The resultant damage to the accused is immediate, irreparable, and serious, especially for someone like myself, since I am so well known,” he said.

“I am not alone in this assessment, as multiple canon lawyers and civil and criminal attorneys have stated publicly that the procedure does grave damage to the accused from the outset, regardless of rhetoric denying this, and has little regard for any form of meaningful due process,” Fr. Corapi added.

“All of the allegations in the complaint are false, and I ask you to pray for all concerned,” he said.

The Diocese of Corpus Christi, where the Society of of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity's mother house is located, said that although the case is outside its jurisdiction – given that Fr. Corapi is not a priest of the diocese – making the assumption that he is guilty of the allegations “is definitely not in order.”

“Fr. Corapi has done many great things – he should be presumed innocent of these allegations until proven otherwise,” Marty Wynd, director of communications told CNA in a March 21 phone interview.

“There's so many great priests who've done great things,” he added. “We have to be very, very careful here, and not presume any kind of guilt.”

Fr. Sheehan noted that the situation will now be “investigated internally, and unless and until information suggests otherwise it will not be referred to civil authorities.”

“In the event that we learn of any occasion where the criminal civil law may have been breached we will immediately refer the matter to civil authorities,” he added.

I do not believe any allegations against Father Corapi. This is just an example of an attack upon the character of a holy priest!

Oh how I love Father Corapi. He has blessed us with such amazing inspiration. God in heaven please free him immediately from this awful situation. Strengthen Father as he endures the snares of the devil. And please help the accuser that she find the love of God.

While I ain't no fan of Fr. Corapi I do think that the bishops' readiness to bring down living hell on the head of any priest accused of serious misconduct is yet another symptom of clericalism. As I have made clear in the past on this forum I ain't got much use for bishops' ways of handling problems. They used to try and sweep embarassing realities under the rug. Nowadays they like to act like a buncha tough guys in a vain effort to convince folks they've had a collective change of heart.

I still adhere to my suspicion that a lot of what they do they do in order to protect themselves and their cozy, comfy lifestyles. (man, them lawsuits are expensive) I don't for a minute believe it's about Jesus.

I wish I didn't think this way but I do. I ain't gonna be receptive to being labelled as uncharitable on this issue. If I said here all of what I REALLY think, then that might be uncharitable...or not.

And I'll sure pray for Fr. Corapi.

I will add my prayers with the others who are praying.

And I will also add that let's not speculate. If you really need to discuss the way these situations are handled in the Church that's fine, but not with named people.

Many thanks!

And as we have seen even more recently with Fr. Angelus (Melkite) it is an all-too often occurrance. Prayers for everyone involved.

One just never knows the whole truth in these situations, yet I'm not sure on which side those in authority should err.

Case in point- a very popular priest gave ignatian retreats throughout the country and was the spiritual director for the Missionaries of Charity. The priest was accused of child abuse, which allegedly (at the time) had occured some decades prior. Many rushed to his defense and began raising funds for his legal defense. Many of his defenders claimed that he was being attacked because he was a holy and faithful priest. He was later convicted.

During his subsequent appeal, the priest lost a most ardent defender, benefactor, and friend when the latter's 2 sons revealed to their father that the priest had been molesting them when the priest visited their home or when the boys (at different times) had accompanied the priest as his "personal assistants" to different cities where the priest gave these retreats.

Let's pray that the truth comes to light...

Just a note of clarification.

The "bishops" have done nothing in the case. Fr Corapi was placed on leave by his religious superior who then notified the bishop of the diocese where the religious institute is based.

Fr. Angelus had admitted doing the things he's accused of. That's why Archbishop Cyril (Bustros) suspended him almost immediately.

In cases of possible child abouse, "protecting the innocent" is a trick business.

Even if we ASSUME the accused is innocent until proven otherwise. We KNOW that potential additional victims are innocent and in need of protection.

If the reasons for Fr. John's administrative leave were made public, I'd understand his anger and frustration, but the administrative leave in itself might be the lesser of two evils. However, if they were not made public until Fr. John chose to disclose them through his website, then we can hardly blame the church authorities.

This whole scandal is a mess, no matter from which angle you see it.

Shalom,
Memo

I'm hoping these accusations against Fr. Corapi are proven false. Either error is bad... the earlier error was cover it up and move the guy somewhere else, and now, just the accusation can get you suspended, whether it's true or not. Sad.

And rightly so. Eis polla eti, Despota.

The latest development: Fr. Corapi is leaving active ministry.

Read the announcement: http://theblacksheepdog.us/

or listen to it: http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBlackSheepdog1

Reactions:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/06/about-fr-john-corapi-with-observations-about-our-times/

http://www.ncregister.com/fr.-corapi-has-lost-it.html

http://www.patheos.com/community/diaryof...n-and-sympathy/

The lack of due process described by Father Corapi is the principal reason for my disagreement with the Dallas Charter, and why, rather than submit to a background investigation (I hold a U.S. government security clearance, so I have been investigated many times, far more thoroughly than the pro forma investigations done by the Church) or sign an agreement that waives away all my legal rights, or the "pledge" whereby I agree not to diddle little boys, I simply walked away from teaching ECF after seven years. The whole process is not designed to protect children, or the innocent, but to cover the butts of our God-loving bishops and insulate them and their dioceses from legal liability.

On his blog, Father Z wrote:


But I disagree. The devil certainly doesn't hate bishops, who have done so much help his cause over the centuries. Fortunately, the divine will cannot be gainsaid by the follies and petty jealousies of sinful men.

Turns out bishops were most certainly, directly or indirectly, involved in the Corapi situation. And I agree with Stuart K's post about the Dallas Charter.That's a mean-spirited plan of action if there ever was one. What Fr. Corapi said about it is also accurate. Inflicting misery on others as a response to sacerdotal misconduct: just exactly what can be expected out of clericalised, privileged, threatened and freaked-out, reactionary, incompetent "servant-leaders".(that's the outlandish sobriquet a certain bishop bestowed on himself and his gang of winged-monkeys. God, however, intervened and cast those high-and mighty so-and-sos down from THEIR thrones)

So many people in our Churches know about and insist on the observance of every rule in the book - so pharisaical - but when it comes to the Golden Rule, they ain't got a clue.

I mean all this with love, compassion & empathy - but I mean it. Boy, do I ever.

Very well put Stuart, my sentiments exactly.

I am unfamiliar with the Dallas Charter, esp. as to it's lack of procedural unfairness.

Can someone point out the specific sections that are bad?

Thanks for your help?

http://www.newadvent.org/

If you click on the headline "Breaking: Corapi issues a second statement, and comes out swinging...", and listen to his second talk. I find it rather odd, that a priest would have thousands of dollars to spend. Just listen to the mp3. Were talking hundreds of thousands. Do we have priests who make million dollar incomes!. Or was this all before he became a priest. Sounds like he still has plenty stashed away somewhere from his talk. Please comment after you have listened to it.

Nothing says a priest has to be poor. And none of that changes the fact that the procedures in place under the Dallas Charter are unfair and deny due process to the accused. If you don't believe Father Corapi (whom I don't know from Adam, so I have no dog in that particular fight), try the late Father Richard John Neuhaus and Avery Cardinal Dulles, who also saw through the blather about doing something "for the children".

A good summation of the problem can be found in this recent article from First Things .

Bishops can (and often are) tyrants; power corrupts, and all that. There is here, in the Diocese of Arlington, a priest who was suspended from ministry because he blew the whistle on a fellow priest committing sexual irregularities--after he had first reported this to the bishop, who did nothing. After an extended investigation that revealed no crime or violations on the part of the priest who made the report, he was not reinstated, but remains "suspended from active ministry". He tried to bring suit in Virginia state courts against the Bishop of Arlington (for denying him his livelihood), but the court refused to hear the case because it does not interfere in internal matters of Church administration. Something like four years after the conclusion of the investigation against him, the priest remains in limbo.

The Church is in need of remedial catechesis on the Eighth Commandment.

Those who make false accusations should face penalties as harsh or more severe those faced by their victims.

Here is a reprint of Father Richard John Neuhaus' Scandal Time III , a critique of the Dallas Charter and on the cowardice of the bishops. A snippet:

Not to mention the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

The very latest: http://soltnews.blogspot.com/2011/07/press-release-concerning-fr-john-corapi.html

This shocking and very sad:

Maybe this will shed some light...he is the Emeritus Bishop of the Diocese Corpus Christi


http://abyssum.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/...er-john-corapi/

What is happening to poor EWTN with all these scandals? Lord have mercy!

Maybe, (and forgive me if I offend anyone, and I know that it will be a difficult financial burden)it is time for an optional married priesthood in the Catholic Church? Just a thought because it might help offset the temptations some of these good men and faithful servants are facing in today's world.

I don't see how it could more of a financial burden than the lawsuits have been.

I wish it were that easy, to solve problems like the ones Fr. Corapi got into. But married priests/clergymen sometimes engage in the same behaviours...just here in Dallas the former pastor of the local Greek Orthodox community was credibly accused of sexually abusing the altar boys. The fact that he was married and the father of several children (including a priest) didn't seem to have fazed him.

He is now deceased and buried in the Orthodox Christian section of a large local cemetery. He wanted to be buried as a priest but that did not happen. That he was even interred in the Orthodox cemetery section both astonished and pleased me. I am sorry all this happened - he was never unkind to ME, a lowly uniate...

All of this is both puzzling and tragic. Only God can figure it out.

Sounds like untreated bi-polar/naricisstic personality disorder. Probably stretching back decades.

In that case, he should have gone into politics. He'd fit right in.

Yes I know of this..although such an extreme example is rare amongst married men. In my opinion, this man gave himself over to subjecation of a sexual demon which made him act in the most abominable and sacriledge manner towards young boys. For me, such behaviour is *literally* (not figuratively) demonic! I sometimes wonder if those who I personally believe are temporarily demonically possessed, even realize what they have done! That is why so many do not remember their actions, and why they often live such successful schizophrenic lives.
His poor family and those poor victims! I do pray that God will have mercy on his soul.
Never the less, since so many good priests have left the RC church to marry, why not allow it (I used to feel differently years ago about this matter) and NOT lose them?

I don't dispute you but I am curious why you say that.

The Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity is a new establishment, and could possibly have some non-standard rules about personal assets. However, it certainly seems strange to me that anyone would be allowed to retain any significant amount of personal assets upon becoming a fully-professed member of a canonically-established religious community.

In the case where someone is a "delayed vocation" with an established career, it would seem to be especially important to have the candidate provide a full disclosure of owned assets, along with provisions for their disposal (i.e. it would be wrong for them to go to the community, since that makes the person a member and a benefactor at the same time--not a good situation--while turning them over to family members also presents problems, since in some cases the person could retain the use of the property).

In other words, it would appear that either his superiors were extremely naive in not having taken steps beforehand to avoid foreseeable problems, or Corapi himself was dishonest from the start. Either way, the whole thing stinks.

Let us pray that God may put an end to such nonsense!


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Watch out, he may just do that!

The question is whether politics is a big enough stage for his ego.

With guys like Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton, and, of course, Barack Obama, Father Corapi will get a run for his money.

In the following article you will note towards the bottom, that he won a successful lawsuit and was awarded a great sum of money against a fraudelent doctor who then became the object of an FBI investigation...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Corapi

As a religious priest who took a vow of poverty, any money he won from any lawsuit should have gone to his order. Any attempt to rationalize Fr. Corapi's financial state is doomed to fail because of the facts, 1) he has access to large sums of money, and 2) he is not supposed to have any money.

For interested parties, Fr. Corapi responds to the SOLT "findings"


http://www.sanctepater.com/2011/07/father-corapis-response-to-solts-press.html#links

Fr. Corapi was not a relgious priest as that term is generally understood, he was a member of a society of apostolic life. Members of societies of apostolic life are not religious. They don't take vows of poverty and are able to receive and keep property in accordance with the constitutions of their society. Fr. Corapi's superior has indicated that his lifestyle contravened their constitutions, but what those restrictions are, we don't really know. (Latin Church secular priests are also bound by the Code of Canon law to simplicity of life, which is different than poverty, strictly speaking...)

I think the Latin Church would be better if they simplified their taxonomy of orders. How about two: monastics and not monastics? Works for us. One order, one rule, for both men and women, implemented with the requisite flexibility to meet the spiritual needs of each individual member. Do away with the mendicants and other religious orders, apostolates and whatnot, and get back to basics.

On secular priests being called towards simplicity in life, I am reminded of the old Scotch whiskey ad, which showed a man in a dinner jacket seated in a plush leather chair, with a beautiful woman perched on his arm. "My needs are simple", he said. "I want only the best".

Shlomo Stuart,

I think all the Churches within the Catholic Communion would benefit from your suggestion. Within my own Church, all non-married priests were monastics. Many times a central monastery would serve as the house for the parish priests of a village. So lets say you had a village with 6 Maronite Churches, then you would have a central monastery with at lest 6 priests who were the pastors. The only exceptions was a parish were the priest was married and that ministry was with that family. For example when you run into someone with the name Khoury, that family was the priestly family (similar to the Cohen in the Jewish faith) for a particlar village Church.

Not to have the Church become like the midieval Assyrian Church, but one where religious life is a full part of society. I have tried to turn my homelessness into one of witnessing the Gospel to others, and trying to live a holy life (though I am a great sinner) as an example to others both homeless and not.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Sounds like do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. I'd say, let East be East and West be West.

But the Western practice was a radical discontinuity from the common Tradition of the undivided Church, and one must therefore ask whether or not the current system of religious orders, as it presently operates, is consistent with the Tradition, and in fact serves the purposes of the Church. Or does the fissiparous nature of Western religious orders result in dilution of effort, redundancy, confusion of mission and the effective death of true monasticism in the West. These are not trivial issues.

Apart from these last four blogs that are tangentially related to the main focus of our forum is there any nexus whatever between the egregiously neo-con Fr. Corapi and the Christian East?
Who will deliver us from this nettlesome priest and, more to the point, these nettlesome bloggers?!

I second Father Economos.

I fail to see how the topic of Fr Corapi fits the description "Current news about the Christian East."

I find myself in agreement with Father Economos and LC. The forum description is, as LC, notes "Current news about the Christian East" and Father Corapi's situation in not pertinent in that context.

Historically, we've not always adhered strictly to the stated description of the forum's purpose and there will, undoubtedly, be future instances in which we don't do so. We've allowed news threads on matters that are, at best, tangential to or are even uttterly unrelated to the East, when the news being discussed is of great significance in or to the Christian world in general (ex: the Anglican Ordinariate).

This subject of this particular thread fails of that standard but has been allowed to coninue because of the prominence of the priest at the center of the controversy. It was such a 'hot' topc - at least to those who are or were 'fans' of the man - that it couldn't be ignored. However, it now appears that there is little new to be said and that those who have a need to keep up with the ongoing drama can best do so through the blog world, where commentary on it will continue long past the half-life of the news' import.

For us, the best thing to do is offer prayers for all concerned, the priest, the hierarchs, the religious community involved, the alleged victims, and all those who feel betrayed either by Father Corapi or his accusers.

We might also take from this entire situation a healthy caution about focusing our religious connection so narrowly that it turns chiefly on the preaching of any one man, unless that man be Christ.

The thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated.

Many years,

Neil