Since Fr. John Corapi released his bombshell statement Friday, in which he announced that he was leaving the priesthood, several pieces of new information have emerged that shed light on the situation.
Before we get to those, though, I would like to again call attention to the written statement on his new web site and the narrated version available on YouTube. These present Fr. Corapi’s own explanation of the current situation and provide a valuable source of information regarding it.
I would also point out something that may not be obvious if you are exposed to just one of the two sources: Though the wording is the same in both (except for very slight differences), they are significantly different in tone. In particular, the modulations of Fr. Corapi’s voice convey a tone of reasonableness not conveyed by the words of the printed edition. If you’ve read only the latter, be sure and listen to the former, because it contains important tonal information not captured in the written version.
At the same time, the substance of the two is the same, and the facts are not altered: Fr. Corapi has chosen of his own volition to abandon his priestly ministry rather than wait for the outcome of the investigation of the charges against him.
At this point, allow me to issue . . .
THE BIG RED DISCLAIMER: I do not claim to know whether Fr. Corapi is innocent or guilty. I have no way of assessing that. I pointed this out several times in my previous post, but I got quite a few messages accusing me of “judging” Fr. Corapi and assuming him guilty before the facts are in, etc. None of that is true. I understand that his fans are hurting from recent events, and I fully understand that, so let me once again stress–this time in more emphatic form–that I do not knowwhether he is innocent or guilty. I am trying to offer perspective on the facts as they are known at this time
Now, let’s get to the new information about his situation.
The Black-Sheep Dog ™
I’ve received several communications by email pointing to the fact that Fr. Corapi’s business—Santa Cruz Media of Kalispell, Montana—applied for a federal trademark on the name “The Black-Sheep Dog” over a year ago. The filing was made April 8, 2010, long before the current situation developed.
The filing was made with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and you can read a summary of it here.
The trademark application was granted (specifically, the “notice of allowance” was issued) last month—on May 10, 2011—after Fr. Corapi had stepped aside from active ministry while the investigation of the charges proceeded.
In his announcement last Friday he indicated that his autobiography, “The Black Sheep Dog,” will soon be published. This fits with the description offered in the trademark application, which says that under this mark will be offered:
Printed material, namely, a series of autobiographical nonfiction books in the field of religion and spirituality
So there may be more than one autobiographical book in the planning.
What does this tell us about the current situation?
A primary thing it tells us is that the autobiography, and its name, have been in the planning stages for over a year. It would thus appear that they were not created, and were not originally intended to be launched, during the current environment.
That has implications for how one reads the name “The Black Sheep Dog.” Based on Fr. Corapi’s announcement, which did not indicate that this had been registered over a year ago, one might conclude that it has specific reference to the current situation, which would make it quite disturbing. As I pointed out in my previous post, it would appear to be both an embracing of a “black sheep” identity in conjunction with Fr. Corapi’s abandonment of his priesthood while also seeking to maintain a pastoral “sheep dog” function despite that abandonment.
The visuals used in the YouTube video, which features a closeup of a frightening-looking black dog’s eyes, one of which contains alarmed looking sheep, feeds the disturbing interpretation of the name.
It should be pointed out that the frightening-looking dog’s other eye contains an image of wolves, but as Deacon Greg Kandra points out:
I gotta say: the imagery used on that tape was creepy to the point of being diabolical.
When one realizes that the whole thing had been in the planning stages for over a year, though, a different light is cast on the subject, and however creepy one might find the imagery and the name in the current circumstances, it was not intended to be taken in that way.
This does not lessen the disturbing nature of Fr. Corapi’s abandonment of his priesthood, however.
“The investigation was compromised because of the pressure on the witnesses.”
Another important set of facts was unearthed by the National Catholic Register’s senior editor, Joan Frawley Desmond. In her piece on the subject, several important pieces of information were disclosed by Fr. Corapi’s religious superior, Fr. Gerard Sheehan, SOLT. Among them:
Father Gerard Sheehan, regional priest-servant of SOLT and Father Corapi’s religious superior in the U.S., confirmed June 19 that the order’s investigation faced complications created by a civil suit filed by Father Corapi against the former employee who had accused him of sexual misconduct.
“When she left the company, she signed a contract that she would not reveal anything that happened to her while she was at Santa Cruz Media. Father Corapi paid her for this. Father was suing her for a breach of contract,” said Father Sheehan, though he did not specify why Father Corapi had initiated the non-disclosure agreement.
The civil suit against the former employee created a problem for SOLT investigators.
“In canon law, there can’t be any pressure on witnesses; they have to be completely free to speak. The investigation was compromised because of the pressure on the witnesses. There were other witnesses that also had signed non-disclosure agreements,” said Father Sheehan.
“The canon lawyers were in a difficult situation, and Father does have his civil rights and he decided to follow his legal counsel, which he had a right to do,” he said. “We tried to continue the investigation without speaking to the principal witnesses.”
The investigation was halted after Father Corapi “sent us a letter resigning from active ministry and religious life. I have written him a letter asking him to confirm that decision. If so, we will help him with this process of leaving religious life,” said Father Sheehan.
He expressed disappointment that Father Corapi chose not to remain in SOLT and to refuse the order’s invitation for him to live in community, leaving his Montana home. Father Sheehan said he had tried to arrange a meeting with Father Corapi before any final decision was announced, but had not heard back from him. Father Sheehan said that SOLT would issue a statement shortly.
“We wanted him to come back to the community, and that would have meant leaving everything he has. It would have been a drastic change for him,” Father Sheehan said.
The article also recalled:
In a previous interview with the Register, published after Father Corapi’s suspension, Father Sheehan implicitly acknowledged that the accused priest was not living in conformity with SOLT’s constitution, approved in 1994.
“The founder’s arrangement with Father Corapi was established before that time, when Father Flanagan believed that every mission should take care of its own needs,” noted Father Sheehan at that time. “Now, according to our constitution, a different way of life has been established for members. All the money we make is turned over to the society, which gives us an allowance.”
During that interview, Father Sheehan confirmed that SOLT had “begun to address the issues of members who joined the society before the new constitution. The society is moving to a more organized structural phase of its existence, with all the Church discipline that entails.”
There are several notable things here. Among them are the non-disclosure agreements that Fr. Corapi required (and paid) at least some of those working with him to sign.
What was the reason for this?
I have more than two decades of experience working for religious non-profit organizations, and I can think of three reasons why a non-disclosure agreement of some sort might be sought: (1) to protect customer information, (2) to protect donor information, (3) to protect ideas for products or services that another organization might copy.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason why a non-disclosure agreement covering everything that happened to one during a term of employment would be required. Nor can I think of a reason why a non-disclosure agreement would need to be framed so broadly that it would prevent one from offering testimony to an ecclesiastical investigation regarding whether one had slept with multiple women or engaged in repeated drug use (i.e., the charges against Fr. Corapi).
And so I would be interested to know why Fr. Corapi sought—and apparently paid for—such broadly-framed non-disclosure agreements with several of the witnesses that his superiors sought to interview as part of the investigation.
There could have been an entirely legitimate reason for this—but I cannot think of it off the top of my head. I am thus left at a loss, trying to imagine what such a reason might be.
The Sequence of Events
Whatever the reason for the non-disclosure agreements may be, we may surmise the following as an approximate timeline of the events in question (individual elements might need to be rearranged):
1. Based on an agreement with the founder of his order, Fr. Corapi established a Montana-based media business under his financial control.
2. At some point, Fr. Corapi pays several persons who have business dealings with him to sign non-disclosure agreements regarding events during their term of employment.
3. There is a falling-out with one non-disclosure signer, an employee (presumably 2 occurred before 3, though this is not absolute).
4. The disgruntled signer from 3 complained to religious or ecclesiastical superiors (specifically: the current bishop of Corpus Christi), alleging sexual and drug-related charges against Fr. Corapi.
5. The current bishop of Corpus Christi contacted Fr. Corapi’s religious superiors, requesting an investigation.
6. The investigation was begun.
7. Fr. Corapi filed a civil suit against the complainer from 3, alleging breach of the non-disclosure contract.
8. Other witnesses refused to testify in view of the civil lawsuit against the complainer from 3.
9. Deprived of ready access to these witnesses, Fr. Corapi’s superiors decided to continue the investigation without the key witnesses, using other, less-central witnesses.
10. Rather than allow the investigation to reach its conclusion, Fr. Corapi decided to abandon the priesthood and religious life, sending a letter to his superiors to this effect.
11. His superiors sought to reintegrate him into the life of his religious community, but he has not responded to this request as it “would have meant leaving everything he has. It would have been a drastic change for him,” because “The society is moving to a more organized structural phase of its existence, with all the Church discipline that entails.”
12. Rather than embrace this new situation, Fr. Corapi announced his abandonment of the priesthood and the adoption of the name “The Black Sheep Dog.”
REMINDER: I do not claim to know whether Fr. Corapi is innocent or guilty of some or all of the charges against him.
But the sequence of events described above, even if elements here or there are re-arranged, does not look good (especially since numbers 2, 7, and 10 might be construed as efforts to prevent such an investigation or stop it from reaching a conclusion).
The Bottom-Line
Regardless of what the truth of the above matters may be—and assuming the innocence of Fr. Corapi—there still remains his public abandonment of the priesthood.
This is, for me, the ultimate point.
All the rest are mere incidentals.
I do not understand how so quickly, after only three months, a man such as Fr. Corapi—a man who was ordained by the hands of Bl. John Paul II, a man who had put in almost 20 years of service as a priest, a man who had been supernaturally conformed to Christ so as to serve in persona Christi, a man who had been empowered to turn bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord, a man who was empowered to forgive sins and thus directly save souls from hell—could turn his back on all that without exhausting the avenues of canonical recourse available to him.
Yes, he had been sidelined at least temporarily by his superiors.
Yes, he had had to endure a process that could stand improvement (like all human processes).
Yes, he had a right to be frustrated—if he was innocent, as we may hope in charity.
But how could he walk away from this great boon that had been bestowed upon him?
How could he turn his back on all that and request removal from the priestly and religious life, after only three months of sitting on the sidelines?
Did past saints who were falsely accused do that?
Did Our Lord himself walk away from his commission from the Father when falsely accused?
Even if he felt compelled to “compromise” (in his superior’s words) the investigation with civil law suits against potential witnesses against him, couldn’t he have waited until the investigation was completed with less central witnesses who had not signed non-disclosure agreements with him?
Why did he abandon his priesthood after only three months waiting for the result of an investigation whose processes he himself had intervened to slow?
I don’t have the answers to these questions, but I am left deeply disturbed and disappointed with the situation.
May all of us keep Fr. Corapi, his accusers, and everyone who has been affected by this situation in prayer.
What are your thoughts?
Thank you for the information and the sensible treatment, as always.
If I were a priest, I’d of done the same thing. He knew with the churchs zero tolerance policy he was going to end up like everyone else. Abandoned. Good people are getting spit out of the church because of this. Yes he could of stayed and fought, but it would have been a losing battle I am certain of this. Its completely understandable. I see where everyone is coming from, but I totally see his too.
If he were in canonical limbo, couldn’t he still publish through the New Media as Black Sheep Dog? That’s what I don’t understand: how does giving up his priestly faculties change what he’s already been doing? In the latest audio that was just released he admits that the majority of his priestly minister was not technically minister in the sacramental sense. Why not simply endure canonical suspension, if online ministry is still an option?
I am perplex and confused. It’s like someone just ripped a hole through my heart…all we can do know is to pray for him and for our Church!
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Matthew 16:18
Good people are getting spit out of the church because of this.
The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ. Knowing this how could anyone leave it?
“…it would have been a losing battle I am certain of this.”
Please share the evidence behind your certainty.
I can only think of Padre Pio…and hope that John Corapi follows his example. This is not of God.
I think Catholics must be struggling because Entenauer, Fr. Mary Francis, Corapi, Fr. Cutie….it’s as though there should be no TV priests despite Bishop Sheen having been a wonderful one. That was a different time….and he was a bishop. Maybe we need a moratorium on famous TV priests. I’m sure many of us are thinking now….who’s next….who’s famous…what will his problem be. Will he date Maureen Dowd of the NY Times behind the scenes…OY….yes…I do need a Pint of Ale over this. Many of us are exhausted emotionally. And their TV persona magnifies our expectations of them to perform their lives as flawlessly as Aquinas. I’m feelin’ those “who’s next blues”….but maybe there’s no famous TV priests left. Good….let EWTN be all nuns for awhile.
Actually pray that Oprah’s network doesn’t offer a show to Corapi as Cutie obtained… if he continues in this independent direction….actually pray against this.
I especially like your point about how previous saints have handled such accusations–St. Faustina even had her diary placed on the Index of Forbidden Books, and St. John of the Cross was jailed by his religious superiors, far worse than what is happening to Fr. Corapi. And yet this saint quietly accepted his suffering. This unsettles me that Fr. Corapi would so openly challenge the authorities like this and even prevent them from doing their jobs–nothing good will come of it. And BTW, why did it take so long for this and the previous post to get onto JA.O?
The example of St. John of the Cross is what came to my mind, too. Obedience!
To Quote a good friend of mine:
“The process for electing bishops doesn’t need to change. That is left to the Holy Father and the apparatus he has in place to find out who are solid bishops for transfer to more primatial sees, priests to become bishops, and monks to become abbots. What needs to occur is the insistence that better men be advanced, and purge the hierarchy of lousy legates and nuncios who provide poor choices. As for the 1983 CIC (code of canon law), here is the problem.
In the opening speech of Vatican Council II it was declared a new era for the Church. The Church would no longer resort to “penal” methods of correction, and would instead focus on the elucidation of the truths of our Faith, in an aggiornamento, or updating, of how we say what we believe. This attitude was, in retrospect, naive in the extreme. In an era of nay-saying and rebellion, the Holy Father ushered in a Council that would seek dialog and reconciliation with the Modern world instead of condemnation and confrontation. I don’t think this was an ignorant or malicious goal, but I do think it was naive and imprudent given the times, for it could hardly have come at a more inopportune time. To add to this decision, both Pope Paul VI and his successor John Paul II, in implementing the Council continued the process of failing to condemn and short circuit error.
Even though this is from Wikipedia, it is an accurate summary, so I copy it here:
“Pope Paul’s opening address on 29 September 1963 stressed the pastoral nature of the council, and set out four purposes for it:
— to more fully define the nature of the church and the role of the bishop;
— to renew the church;
— to restore unity among all Christians, including seeking pardon for Catholic contributions to separation;
— and to start a dialogue with the contemporary world.”
Because of this attitude, shepherds largely forsook shepherding, and this includes the Papacy and Curia. Paul VI and John Paul II routinely failed to correct abuses and dissent from bishops or theologians. This is why men like Karl Rahner, Edward Schillebeecks, Marie Coinique Chenu, Jean Danielou, Johann Baptist Metz, Henri De Lubac, Teilhard de Chardin, Yves Congar, Hans Kung, John Courtney Murray, and various other men that were held with suspicion by the Vatican before the Council became not only architects of change and laxity as experts at the Council, but implementers of it in years after the Council. As they unraveled the Church and changed almost everything, they not only weren’t condemned, but flourished — some even becoming Cardinals.
In the revision of Canon Law in 1983, this lack of penal process and oversight by the Vatican was actually codified into the law of the Church. Almost every code in the canon has an “out” now, allowing the national bishop’s conference, or local bishop, to do what they want, when they want. And even with this laxity, in the case of Father Corapi and hundreds of other “black-holed” priests, canon law and civil norms are routinely ignored, because the shepherds do not shepherd and instead seek to punish infidelity to them or to progress. To add to this, we have the last three Popes, who either have had so much to do or they have not been inclined to make episcopal malfeasance a high priority. So, Father Corapi has a fallacious charge used to shelve him indefinitely by Bishop Mulvey. If Bishop Mulvey is doing this to “black-hole” Father Corapi, then he knows it is highly unlikely corrective measures will be imposed on him from the Curia or the Holy Father, and there is little or no way Father Corapi will be able to successfully defend himself and have his suspension lifted before he dies. I personally know three priests who have been “black-holed” – and they are currently averaging 7 years since their suspensions with NO progress made. One was shelved in 2003 one in 2004 and one in 2006. All have no progress.
Priests who are wrongly or maliciously deprived of their active priesthoods are like laborers deprived of justice, deprived of their just wage, and deprived of their God-given vocation. It is a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance.
We live in an era of laxity, “dialog,” no enforcement, and moral relativism. This is why some of your local parishes have been ruined by errant pastors. This is why we have Communion in the hand (started by a cardinal in Belgium in the 1960s in defiance of the Pope), abuse of “Eucharistic ministers,” (an abuse of Canon Law and Church norms introduced in the late 70s and 80s), priests left out to dry for upholding the faith, priests sent for “psychological counseling” and extended sabbaticals because they are “too rigid and authoritarian” for upholding the Faith, perfectly legitimate and pious men screened out of the vocations process or diaconate because they are too “rigid” or intolerant, girl altar boys (another abuse started in defiance of the Vatican in the early 1990s), lousy or absent catechetics, as many Catholics using artificial contraception and having abortions as non-Catholics, devotions like the Rosary, Eucharistic Adoration, 40 hours devotions, parish missions, as absence of good solid Marian or Ignatian or Benedictine retreats, Mass attendance at 20-25%, belief in transubstantiation and the Sacrifice of the Mass at 20-25%, and men and women all over the Church not only still in the Church (even though they manifest an absence in belief in what the Church believes and does) but often still holding professorships, clerical positions in parishes or positions in chanceries and seminarians and universities, when they CLEARLY do not believe in Catholicism any more. Bad bishops make bad law and refuse to enforce it, or wield it for intimidation and silencing of good Catholics, while many other bishops allowed all sorts of deviants into the seminary to molest our children, and then betrayal of trust leads to priests and laity not trusting bishops, not trusting the Pope, and leaving the Church or become in despair. Bishop Mulvey may be acting in good faith in this situation, but even if he is, the complexity of contract law, canon law, and Father’s relationship with SOLT guarantees YEARS of waiting for a resolution. Google the retired Bishop of Corpus Christi, his Excellency Rene Gracida, who has, I think, a very measured explanation of exactly what Father is trying to accomplish in this situation.
So you have a loose Canon Law coupled with an unwillingness on the part of the Holy Father correct, or impose penalty, on his brother bishops, even though they are his subordinates. Bishops “black-hole” priests that cause problems on a regular basis. Often the same bishops will let liberals or heretics run amok in the parishes of their diocese, unless they cause substantial problems, or bad PR, for the diocese. “Thou shalt not rock the boat” is the unofficial 11th Commandment in the Catholic Church today.
I’m not sure I agree with Father Corapi’s haste to leave the active priesthood – for which he may or may not be involuntarily laicized. Nor do I agree with his unwillingness to make more of a public fuss and force expedition of the canonical process. He has chosen not to. His reasons are his, and they are the reasons he has to live with, and die with. We all have decisions to make, and live with. The onus is upon him to remain in Communion with the Church, to be stridently and unflinchingly Catholic, to speak as he has always spoken in defense of first and foremost Our Lord, our Blessed Lady, Holy Mother Church, the Holy Father, and the indefectable Magisterium and Deposit of Faith. if he does not, he will imperial his immortal soul and risk the damnation the Lord Rescued him from over 30 years ago. It would be a pity to waste all that God has given him.
For all of this, I do not despair. Father Corapi has decided to leave the active priesthood because he’s stuck. I have hope that he will continue his God-given apostolate in a new way. There are many great things happening in the Church amongst laity and religious. New congregations, new orders, renewal of old orders like the Redemptorists, Dominicans, and even Jesuits (many young Jesuits are actually solidly Catholic!), the Fraternity of St. Peter and other traditional Rite groups, the continued progress of reconciliation of the SSPX (scoff not… their reconciliation is important and at this point almost as many French souls attend the SSPX as diocesan parishes in France), new found faith in Perpetual Adoration, 40 hours devotions in places, the Pope has encouraged Cardinal Ouillet to remove four bishops in the past year, home-schoolers teaching their children the Faith proper (like my family), and groups of Catholics refusing to knuckle under, being encouraged by late-comers such as Michael Voris (RealCatholicTV). The Church is simultaneously being destroyed and being reborn. Obviously God shall not be mocked, and the Church will be reborn as the old passes away, because the Bride of Christ is always new, always young, always vibrant even in the face of degradation and persecution.
Lastly, for all those here and elsewhere on the internet sniping at Father Corapi and condemning him, you too shall have measured unto you the measure with-which you judge. God have mercy on your souls.”
Dan Hunter
Is it true that Corapi has effectively shut down the investigative process by suing the witness over the non disclosure form? In all your text, you didn’t face that.
And have you actually done an exhaustive study of that list of theologians whom you denigrated. It would take about ten years. If not, you’ll be explaining to many of them at the Judgement just how they were equivalent to Hans Kung. Good luck with that.
ps
Hans Kung was dechaired from teaching by the Vatican while your text says he was not condemned but flourished. What sin of the tongue is that?
On de Lubac and Von Balthasar:
“about de Lubac?
Henri de Lubac was an avid defender of the evolutionist/pantheist Teilhard de Chardin. Teilhard also propagated great confusion regarding the natural and supernatural orders, claiming that nature evolves into supernature — again, modernism!
Can Teilhard be defended as orthodox?
Not at all. How is it possible to defend a man who makes pantheistic statements such as, “Catholicism deceived me with its narrow definitions of the World … The World around me becomes divine …”
Did de Lubac have any regrets?
At the end of his life, he started to wonder if perhaps he hadn’t allowed himself to stray into forbidden doctrine. He wrote, “This period is as full of error as any … maybe I should have concentrated more on essentials … for the last seven or eight years I have been paralyzed by the fear of confronting head on, in concrete fashion, the essential problems in their scolding reality? Out of wisdom or weakness? Was I right or wrong?” By then, however, he had already done his damage. Today, his cult lives on.
Who Was Hans Urs von Balthasar?
Father von Balthasar was a disciple of the New Theology whose books are extremely popular within “conservative” circles. In the 1930s, he developed a powerful aversion to the scholastic theology of St. Thomas. He then became greatly influenced by Karl Barth, the famous Protestant thinker. Von Balthasar made Christ, rather than the Catholic Church, the center of Christian unity — as if Christ could somehow be divorced from His one true Church — hence, paving the way for “Catholic” ecumenism. He favored and incorporated the philosophy of Hegel, which is the philosophy of “becoming” (never ending movement), as opposed to the sound Thomistic philosophy of “being”. Never-ending-movement, constant flux — again, modernism.
What effects did this have?
Many. One of the most serious is that it established a new principle of “Living Tradition” which holds that Tradition, and therefore doctrine, can change. Father Boulliard, a disciple of the New Theology said, “A theology which is not current [does not keep changing] will be a false theology.”
Did these thinkers have any influence on Vatican II?
These thinkers were THE influence on Vatican II. In his book, Vatican II Revisited, Bishop Aloysius Wycislo, a rhapsodic advocate of Vatican II, writes that “Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis had . . . a devastating effect on the work of a number of pre-conciliar theologians” Wycislo then rejoiced that “theologians and biblical scholars, who had been ‘under a cloud’ for years, surfaced as periti (theological experts advising the Bishops) at Vatican II.” This despite the Council rules that no theologian who had ever been under suspicion should be admitted as a theological expert at the Council. Wycislo mentioned by name these theologians as Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, John Courtney Murray, Yves Congar, Edward Schillebeeckx, and Henri de Lubac. ”
Dan Hunter
You misrepresented about Hans Kung and in response now you’re sliming other people via non contexted fragmentary quotes….. one of which people is read by Pope Benedict.
Again we ask you: why won’t Corapi let the woman testify and he can then testify that she is lying. In short, if Corapi were going to become this Black Sheep Dog figure, he could have done that after she testified and he then declared she was lying….and then if the Bishop believed her and not him. But the Bishop may have believed Corapi and not her…unless there were other witnesses corroberating. Why did he prevent her even testifying through the threat of money loss?
Bill,
Listen to Fr Corapi’s audio file on his webpage and he explains all that.
Listen to it…
Congar was strongly censured by the Vatican for his book “True and False Reform in the Church”. He lost his teaching position and was successively exiled from Paris to Strasbourg, Jerusalem and London. Chenu lost his place as dean of “Le Saulchoir” – the famous Dominican School in Paris – for his book The Saulchoir, a School of Theology. De Lubac lost his chair at the Jesuit School of Lyon-Fourvière for his book Catholicism. Rahner, von Balthasar and Ratzinger were considered suspect of heresy by the Holy Office.
Pope Benedict XVI has changed for the better considerably from those days when he was Fr Ratzinger, and was suspect of the Holy Office.
I do not claim to know ANY of the facts other than what I have read on this website and Fr. Corapi’s site.
Just being logical it seems odd to me that in a matter of a few days Jimmy has came up with “new” information,
(which I am grateful and thankful for his time and effort to help us understand what it going on)
It looks on the surface to me of trademarking the black sheep dog name, and looking at the new website that this was in planning for a while….
I would suggest longer than a year, that is when he submitted a trademark request…
I would think logically he would have been planning that for a good while before submitting his request.
Anywho….it sure doesn’t smell all that good to me. With the graphics on the site along with the new name….seems he saw this coming for a while which is really disturbing.
Just my .02 cents….nothing more. Thanks Jimmy once again for posting the facts. Much appreciated.
I listened the other day. He does not want her to testify harmless. But if he were innocent, he could give up that condition if it is just her word against his because a Bishop is not going to believe her over him….unless there is additional evidence besides her word. If there is additional evidence beside her word, then that would explain his resisting. He still might be innocent if there is additional evidence but his subsequent actions make that unlikely. The NT says: “If any man is in Christ, he is a new creature…the former things have passed away, behold they are made new.”. To then reject your name “Father” and call yourself “Black Sheep Dog”….. is not consonant with promoting what the NT is saying in that passage….and he filed for that trademark a year ago…..perhaps…perhaps knowing that something was going to hit the fan. None of these choices help people believe he is innocent.
Bill,
This whole blacksheepdog thing might be a knee jerk reaction to all the pain Fr Corapi is going through right now.
Do you believe that Fr Corapi actually did drugs and sexually moved on some woman?
I have the very strong belief [and it only my opinion] that Fr is 100% innocent of this accusation.
I have been in a somewhat similar situation myself once, where all I did was ignore a person that did not want me to ignore them and this person started accusing me of some outlandish lies.
So I kind of know how Father feels.
I’m not sure if this will be read at this point – comments coming so quickly, I’m at the bottom of the pile, so to speak.
I thank Jimmy for his reasoned analysis. It conforms to mine mostly. there are a couple of other things that come to mind:
1) As Fr. Corapi said during his Monday podcast – he has not been much involved in public ministry in priestly duties. He has been lecturing and writing. This, to me, is a bit of a concern. Perhaps he’s lost sight of the sacrament from a human perspective. He has after all been physically remote, and isolated from a community for a while.
Being stuck lecturing and writing sounds like an academic life. We all know that academics can lose sight of their common sense.
“The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. He is the man who has lost everything except his reason.” GKC
2) On the side of being isolated – and on his own project – it’s easy for pride to creep in. I see it in myself at least, so it’s a possibility. If not full blown pride, it could color his viewpoint. He has earthly attachments – so much that he can’t just drop everything, what would his supporters think?
“I have to keep speaking, how will the Gospel be preached?” – comes to mind as a possible reaction. He’s lost perspective.
3) We don’t know what the profits of his corporation are – or whether money is poisoning his viewpoint. It can be subtle, which shows the wisdom of the direction SOLT is going.
Dan
The trademark was sought a year ago. That is not knee jerk. Who would have thought Fr. Entenauer who denounced Hannity as a heretic for birth control would have romantically
embraced a recently possessed and delivered woman? But he admitted it much to his credit but Corapi could have noticed that Entenauer became “unknown” after that and after it having been found that his exorcism work at times did not have any oversight by anyone above him. God does require perfection for His continued Love but Corapi may have noticed that media Catholicism does. What I always found disturbing in Corapi was his inference that he would never cave in as some theologians have. One should be silent in that area. The Catholic far left dissents on dogma not just doctrine/ the Catholic far right schisms….both are mortal sin. Of course Corapi will not dissent….his danger is schism….a different mortal sin.
that should read: God does not require perfection for His continued Love
Curious – is there anything to the fact that the web addresses:
theblacksheepdog.com
theblacksheepdog.net
Both go to a Website called
Onlinecatholicnetwork.com ??
Given that Santa Cruz has trademarked “The black-sheep dog” makes this very interesting.
Dan
Do you realize that in your first post you list theologians who “not only were never condemned, but flourished” and now recently you list some of the same people as losing their University chairs in punishment for their books. Which is it? They were not condemned and flourished or they lost their chairs? And are you reading these accounts at a far right Catholic web site with no footnotes to actual published real books….as in real publishers off the internet?
Why would anyone say that they are 100% sure that Corapi is innocent? Why would anyone say they are 100% sure he is guilty?
Isn’t Corapi human?
Corapi’s Catechism has helped me learn the Catholic Faith. I do not have Faith in Corapi. I do not know his innocence or guilt but I do know that he has left a bad taste in my mouth. I will not follow someone called Black Sheep Dog. That is enough for me to run and take cover, whether he is innocent or guilty.
Bill,
I am sorry that I did not cite a refernce for my sources.
They are from “The Devastated Vineyard” by Dr Dietrich Von Hildebrand.
There is, I think, a non-scandalous explanation for the domain registration. If he bought the domain when he began work on the autobiography, the domain may have been intended simply as a promotional site for that book, linked to his other sites. (In this way it would not be dissimilar to the site for The Fathers Know Best… ) I’m not saying this IS the situation. But it is a POSSIBLE explanation.
Whether this was his original intention or not, I don’t know, but now it seems that Fr. Corapi is also trying to create a cult of personality around himself with this whole “BlackSheepDog” thing, almost like people should follow him instead of the ecclesiastical authorities–weird. I wouldn’t have expected him to give a response like he has.
Jimmy, I think a reason for paying for such a all inclusive nondisclosure agreement might be to protect against unauthorized biographies. Its something celebrities/public figures should have, to protect against employees with a certain level of access that would have instant credibility to publish an unauthorized biography or do paid interview etc.
“Do you believe that Fr Corapi actually did drugs and sexually moved on some woman?”
I have no idea. But I have listened to a few of his talks on the radio. I remember one in particular, where he talked about his vow of obedience. He said that it was a liberating vow, because he didn’t have to wonder what God wanted him to do. He knew that his superior’s will was God’s will.
His religious superior asked him to stay silent while the investigation proceeded. He disobeyed. And as he said in his talk, since his superior’s will was God’s will, he was not only disobeying his superior, but God as well.
And THAT, as far as I am concerned, is infinitely worse than sex, drugs, and rock’n roll.
Wanted to comment last night when I read this on my phone but I waited until today. I have been heartbroken since this broke on Ash Wednesday and my heart broke further when I read and saw the statements on line in the past few days.
I just want to say thank you for your assessment. It was fair and it helped me understand a lot of what I was feeling about this whole thing.
I wish I could know what the truth was because then I would not feel so confused, but your assessment really helped me understand why I am so disappointed in Father Corapi. It is not about what did or did not happen it is about how he is responding that seems to completely run counter to his 20 years of professed love for the Church, the Priesthood and his own vows. We’re all human and we arfe far from perfect, but I can not in good conscience continue to follow Father Corapi. It took some time but I finally got back to the heart of it which is that I have but one Shepherd, and it is not Father John Corapi. Anything that pulls my heart from my Shepherd is not somthing I need in my life. In letting go I only ask for the continued prayers for all involved in this most painful mess.
Blessings.
Something’s not adding up…..went over to that blacksheepdog blog where he was supposedly going to make recorded conversations with his accuser available over the internet. The when his “herd” begged him not to he rescinded. The whole “blacksheepdog” thing smells! Our own pastor has been goign through a very similar ordeal: accused in Augost ’09, didn’t know who the accuser was, was allowed to stay in our parish with special rules until February ’11 when the Cardinal put 20+ priests on adminstrative leave. Rather than lash out at his accuser our good pastor has spent the last 4 months in seclusion but keeping in touch with his flock. He prays for us and we pray for him. He has only ever asked for prayers for himself and his accuser.
Fr. Corapi, on the other hand, if it is really him behind the “Blacksheepdog” stuff, has threatened in public to tear his accuser down. This is not Christ-like, this is not the attitude of a person in recovery, and least of all it is not like a humble servant of God. Something just does not add up. You do not go from a humble servant of God whom thousands adore to a threatening ogre that he showed the propensity to be in just a few short months.
Since Fr. Corapi began dyeing his goatee black I got the impression that something was wrong with him (although now it at least makes sense that he rebrand himself as the “Black” Sheep Dog).
I think Ken is right, Fr. Corapi is not the same man he was many years ago (although I do think he is behind the Blacksheep Dog Brand) – he seems to be more interested in selling product than saving souls.
Whether he was a saint before I do not know but I know that his preaching led many to a deeper appreciation of the Faith, and God will work with that to make good come from it.
One thought on public scandal, which occurred to me the past day or so was that it does afford the opportunity for the guilty to repent, whether they be public politicians, priests, or professional athletes. God doesn’t want your sin to stay in the dark until the end – He wants us with Him, and will give us ample opportunity to repent. Scandal can just be another opportunity for God to bring His children home.
Pray for Fr. Corapi and all our priests!
Bishops grossly mishandled the pedophilia scandal and were brought to their knees by the secular media over it. Would of been nice if they were brought to their knees out of a sense of Holiness. They have come up with this one size fits all policy. In doing that, they put the 99% of good priests at risk because 1% of the priesthood is behaving insideusly. That is an abuse of power that needs to be checked. Corapi is the guy that may check it. Acutely, Fr. Corapi is going under the bus and will never get his reputation back regardless of the outcome of this “trial”. Why? Because the Bishops are protecting their own self interests again. Cowardice, that is just a different shade of grey
There never was a “pedophilia” scandal. There was a scandal of homosexual predators preying on teenage boys and young men.
“Because the Bishops are protecting their own self interests again.” We’re waiting to see your evidence.
“Dang.
I wish things had gone better.
Fr. Corapi has “lost it.”
And by “it” I mean any likely chance of working as a priest again.”
Akin- What a phony you are!!!…and quite transparent.
Whats the matter? Did it finally dawn on you that you didn’t have the “best conversion story” Or that someone actually knows more about our religion and church than you? Some one that actually had a hand in editing the “Catechism of the Catholic Church”?
You sound like a moron that has been waiting for Fr. Coropi to fall…and “DANG”
your enjoying the hell out of it!!!
Wait, D . . . is TBSD (or are you, for him) actually now claiming he had a hand in editing the Catechism? The legend grows by leaps and bounds!
English translation of d’s post: WAAAAAHHHHHH!
I went to see Corapi once and he struck me as totally bogus – a performer who fancied himself. He loved to brag about his prior sinful exploits. He was a mjor-league drama queen. There was definitely a cult of personality thing going on. No one should invest too much emotional attachment to any human (whether it’s Pio, JPII, Corapi or Escriva). Speaking strictly from a practical point of view, subtle evangelism seems to taken root more deeply. Fr. Benedict Groeschel comes to mind. Hopefully I haven’t missed some scandal involving him…
It seems to me that the Church’s “zero tolerance” policy would have absolutely nothing to do with this case unless he were eventually found guilty of some crime. The policy has to do with not allowing a priest back into ministry after having been determined to be guilty, unlike years ago when a priest might be determined to have been successfully rehabilitated. If a priest is found innocent, he can return to ministry. If Fr. Corapi can prove his innocence, zero tolerance won’t prevent him from continuing in ministry. Even if he is found guilty, since the zero tolerance has to do with pedophilia he might still have the opportunity to repent and continue in ministry if it does not cause scandal. He might be prevented from continuing as a priest if the crime had to do with solicitation in the confessional.
Tonal? Are you a psychologist? Father Corapi was being treated unjustly by his superiors. “If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience.”–Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1903. He was justified in not excepting the offers presented to him. He is also correct in fighting back against these injustices.
Here is a piece from Real Catholic TV on the way some celebrity Catholic bloggers have treated his situation;
http://www.realcatholictv.com/premium/?vidID=vort-2011-06-23&ssnID=157
ps;
Fr Corapi is a great great teacher!
He helped my wife and I come back to the Catholic Church.
Why does someone have to be a psychologist to use an adjective?
I have been using Fr. Corapi’s Catechism series to teach Catholic adult education in my parish. My pastor, who is a Canon Law attorney and judge, made the decision for to continue to use Fr. Corapi’s DVDs until this matter is resolved. The developments this week changed all that. In light of “The blacksheepdogs” decision to not cooperate with the internal investigation by SOLT, we are dropping using any of his DVDs. My pastor takes his role seriously to guard his flock and keep us in union with the bishops and the Holy Father who are in union with Jesus Christ Himself. A sheepdog needs a shepherd. Faithful Catholics need to be guided by, and follow the bishops who are working in communion with the Vicar of Christ. This is why Jesus established His Church with His Vicar on earth, the Pope. The blacksheepdog appears to be teaching distrust and disobedience of the Church’s shepherds.
Cathy
How does FR Corapis current situation effect his presentation of the CCC over 10 years ago? Which presentation has recieved an Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat.
The content in Fr’s CCC DVD’s has not changed and it is all doctrinally sound and Church approved.
Also, Cathy, how is Fr Corapi, on his new webpage, teaching disobedience of the Church’s shepherds?
Could you please provide references to back up this accusation?
[Cathy
How does FR Corapis current situation effect his presentation of the CCC over 10 years ago? Which presentation has recieved an Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat.
The content in Fr’s CCC DVD’s has not changed and it is all doctrinally sound and Church approved.
Also, Cathy, how is Fr Corapi, on his new webpage, teaching disobedience of the Church’s shepherds?
Could you please provide references to back up this accusation?]
Dan: My pastor believes that Fr. Corapi’s current situation has a direct effect on his parishoners by us religious ed teachers using his DVDs of the CCC. Our using his material not only promotes Fr. Corapi himself and creates more “fans” of his, but also promotes disregarding the Church’s teachings on obedience, in favor of civil rights. When our parishoners are taught by Father Corapi about Church teaching, and then find out the situation he is in, it creates confusion in some who are not firmly grounded in what obedience to the Church means.
They could decide that the Church’s teachings about obedience to the Church that Christ founded and gave His authority to, is not that important. They could decide, that their civil rights take precedence. They could decide they have the right to decide things like the use of artificial birth control for themselves, instead of obeying the Church’s authority to forbid it. They could decide they know better what is good for themselves than the local bishop who is their shepherd who is in unity with the Holy Father and the whole Body of Christ. In short we run the risk of producing Cafeteria Catholics. We have enough of those.
My pastor uses no priest’s material who is not in good standing with the Church. If his priestly faculties are removed, we are not allowed to use his material. The pastor of the parish is the shepherd of his flock and can make this decision as long as he is in union with his bishop. My pastor believes in obedience to his superiors as long as they are in union with the Holy Catholic Church. Obedience to Church authority is something that is not only for priests, but for lay Catholics as well.
Cathy, what your pastor is practicing is an oft-forgotten (these days) virtue: Prudence.
Cathy,
I know that we must be obedient in matters of Faith and Morals to Church superiors.
This is part of the Deposit of the Faith.
But again, where in Fr Corapi’s presentation of the CCC or any of his other sermons does he deviate from Church teaching?
I have many of his DVD’s and have never seen where he contradicts the Magisterium.
Fr Corapis contoversial move has not changed what he has always and everywhere taught.
Because what he taught for years and years was highly sought after by orthodox men in the Church, both laynen and Churchmen and was used by many good teaching outlets, this teaching is not all of a sudden changed because of some supposed wrong or odd move he made.
One day black is black
the next black is white.
Odd.
@Dan Hunter:
The presentations are fine, and still true. However, the man who produced them is currently involved in a great scandal. For a seasoned Catholic, they might be able to be fine taking the good of the sermons and separating it from the personality of Fr. Corapi. A new convert is not in the position to make fine distinctions.
There are plenty of catechetical works of great value (including, but not limited to the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” itself), that we do not need to rely on materials made by disobedient priests.
There is more to catechesis than a good presentation of facts.
I continue to learn the Truth of the Catholic Faith from Fr Corapis’s work and I continue to use his teaching DVDS’S which have an Imprimatur, in my catechism classes, and they continue to convert my students to the Church.
I also use the Catechism of Trent, the Baltimore Catechism and various other Catholic tools.
Fr Corapis teaching is just that teaching in the Magisterial Catholioc Sense.
St Faustinas works where placed, by the Holy See on the Index of Forbidden books in the 40’s, yet my grandparents continued to read them and came into the Church primarily because of them.
We should not shut out others from heaven.
From Fr Corapis web page:
“I am sincerely thankful to all of you that have been kind and charitable, and also those that have perhaps been something less than that. Everyone has their opinions, and a perfect right to them. I respect that. Knowledge is a great thing, but as the old saying goes, “A little knowledge can be dangerous.” There is a dilemma that we face in the information age: On the one hand we want to use all of the marvelous technology we have. On the other hand, we don’t want to end up guilty of scarcely having a single unpublished thought. We have to say something, but we can’t say everything.
I think it’s a bit too easy to arrive at an erroneous conclusion when you base it on a fallacious presupposition. For instance, some very kind and fine people assume that I have “left the Church.” Please, understand this, I have not left the Church. I love the Catholic Church and would not “leave the Church.” I have resigned from public ministry, which is rather anticlimactic to be sure since I was out of it anyhow due to the suspension or “administrative leave,” which is tantamount to suspension. There are elements of this that you don’t know about, and that’s not your fault.
Once a man is ordained a priest he remains a priest for all eternity. Holy Orders is one of the three sacraments that imprints an indelible mark on the soul. What the Church can give or remove is “faculties”, which authorizes the person to publicly administer the sacraments. I always cringe when I hear “he’s not a priest anymore.” If he ever was, he still is. What they mean is that he is not functioning in the normal way most priests function, that is, publicly administering the sacraments. Most folks’ contact with priests is the parish priest. They come in contact with him primarily when he administers the sacraments.
A priest is ordained primarily to confect the Eucharist. A validly ordained priest can do this in the normal setting of a parish or community celebration of the holy Eucharist, or in private, as I have done for twenty years. It has the same power. The power is not from how many people are present, it is from the same sacrifice of Calvary made present in time and space. The celebration of the sacraments is a monumentally noble, holy, and powerful thing. Please don’t misunderstand me and think I believe anything less than that. Each of us is called to a unique way of serving God and society. Certainly I was called to be a priest, but not as a parish priest, and that is not out of character with the history and tradition of the Church. St. Paul was a mission preacher basically. He traveled widely and preached. He did not function like a parish priest, at one time almost boasting that he thanked God that he hadn’t baptized many of them as he didn’t want to share in their sins. He was not demeaning the sacrament, just thankful he wouldn’t have to answer to God for having some share in profaning such a holy state of life.
My mission was discerned by my legitimate superior in the Church long before I was ordained. It was preaching. He, Fr. James Flanagan, told me this in 1987. I was ordained in 1991. He said it would be a huge mistake for me to ever be constrained by a parish or conventional way of life in one place. I did not take this upon myself. It was given to me by the Church and I was sent. Please don’t think I don’t value the sacraments. I do. However, the public administration of the sacraments was never what the Church told me to do. They sent me to preach. The two are not mutually exclusive. They are complimentary. Not all of the members of the Body of Christ are the same, but they are all necessary, noble, and holy.
Some of you have thought I might have acted too fast and not given the Church enough time to complete their investigation. You could be right, but you also don’t know the facts like I do. The utter disregard for our reasonable requests and certain statements made by the lawyer for the Society of Our Lady confirmed to us that they would not complete the investigation so long as I insisted in exercising my civil and human rights. That is a dead horse. Why beat it? My lawyers would not allow me to continue unless ten questions were answered regarding the nature of the process—simple reasonable questions. They ignored the request for 6 weeks and still ignore it. These weren’t rocket science questions. At a future time we’ll publish the entire letter and the questions.
For about ten years I have been attacked, threatened, and endured extortion attempts. The leadership of the Church never lifted a finger to help me in any way with this. Every time someone gets angry with me or decides they want a payday I have to go through hell with no help from the leadership of the Church. I admit I have grown weary of that. The trauma created by all of the sexual abuse of minors scandals has warped the judgment of some in authority. They are running scared. I believe in my case they panicked. “We don’t know if the dog is rabid, but let’s shoot him in the head just in case.” Well, this black sheep of a sheepdog has been “shot in the head” before and lived to tell about it. I’ll be telling about it for awhile longer.
The name “The Black Sheep Dog” is the title of my autobiography, a title which I came up with about a year and a half ago. That title was, by the way, stolen by a person who worked for me while they were working for me, attempting to secure internet domain names under that title. That is in effect a violation of federal intellectual property laws since I have both registered trademarks and copyright on that title. The title is simply the combination of a black sheep, that would be me; and a sheepdog, that would also be me. The concept of a sheepdog guarding the flock is certainly biblical and also an idea I gleaned from an article from LTC Dave Grossman, which we’ll post for you to read at a future date, or you can read it on the internet where it has been circulating for some time.
Listen my friends, I realize this situation is less than ideal. I don’t like it either, but under the circumstances I honestly believed and still do that I had one of two choices to make:
1. Crawl under a rock and quietly die; or
2. Don’t crawl under the rock and don’t die. I feel that I still have something to offer.
The leadership of the Church has made it clear to me they don’t want me anymore. They have a right to do that and I have to accept that. So, I’ll do what I can outside of the Church. I’m not leaving the Church. I am simply doing something else in life so that I won’t wither up and die, and so that you can still derive some benefit from my gifts from God. It may not be as good as before, or it may be better. The only thing I know for sure is that I’m not going to disobey the Church and attempt to “minister” as a priest, and I’m not going to lay down and die. I’m not ready to do that just yet. As a matter of fact, you might be pleasantly surprised at what’s in our future. Stay in touch. We may not have the old meeting places anymore, but we have some new ones and I would like to meet you there. Until next time this is the Black SheepDog, unleashed and very much alive.”
I agree with Dan Hunter on the whole Corapi thing. If we’re going to compare him to someone in the past, try St. Paul–he’d have ooked out Iska and Rebecca bigtime.
Carol,
Forgive my naivite on foreign languages, but what does “ooked out Iska and Rebecca bigtime”, mean?
Excuse me, I speak Ook. Iska and Rebecca are previous commenters who each indicated a level of discomfort with or distrust of some aspect of TheBlackSheepDog’s presentation. It/he ooked them out–struck them as creepy or made them suspicious, raised their hackles (to stick to the canine analogy). Commenter Carol believes St Paul would have had an even more profoundly ookie effect on them. Having now dispatched my duties as translator, let me go on record that I’m with Iska and Rebecca. Consider me ooked by TBSD, to the max.