Monday, 21 March 2011

Fr. Corapi

I used to find Fr. Corapi unbearable. I thought he was one of the worst aspects of EWTN - a brand of American "Trad" Catholic that often comes across as overbearing, OTT and annoying. Then I decided to listen to him. I heard him speaking about an experience he had (not mystical in case you are wondering) with the Blessed Sacrament. It was about reverence for the "particles". I agree with him and I was moved by his devotion and his courage (he was "shipped out" as they say for his behaviour). Given this and his clear and reasoned defence of the Faith (I now believe he is excellent and possibly one of the greatest defenders of the Faith of this time), I cannot believe the accusations made against him (see here). The enemy will attack those who are involved in the work of the salvation of souls. I pray for him and hope that he will soon be able to leave his administrative leave.
On his website he asks questions about the way accused priests are treated. I agree with him. I know of two cases of real doubt where priests were left "on leave", two cases of gross injustice with regard to cases thousands of miles apart. In one case the bishop's actions should have been grounds for a serious inquiry. I cannot say any more except that I was involved in one case as a "sounding-board" for one priest. I believed he was innocent. I still believe this. Sadly, by the time he got to me he was an emotional wreck. Yes, we must be severe and apply strong safeguards, but we should not allow ourselves to fall into the mistake of accepting "collateral damage" in the shape of innocent priests whose lives and health may then be wrecked.


  1. I've got his addictions c.d. It's very good. Also one about Our Lady.

  2. I am a teacher. On average I am falsely accused of racism or swearing, or something trumped up by someone I am trying to discipline, about three times a year. I win no friends by pointing out to colleagues that priests should be given the same benefit of the doubt as teachers give each other.

  3. I note that there has been a lively discussion on other blogs about this matter. One priest said that he would never criticise another priest or a bishop on his blog. Others have said that we cannot ever know what anyone will do - including a priest who appears to be devout and who teaches the faith correctly. Others have argued that "administrative leave" is all we have - or that we should all keep quiet about the matter. Still others are saying that the treatment of priests over such accusations is not satisfactory. I suppose all these different views - and others I have not mentioned - are to be expected in cases like this. However, the demands of justice are clear, whatever the case may be; a person is innocent until proven guilty and therefore (as hard as it may be) the accused must be treated with the respect that is due to an innocent man until the situation changes. Presumed guilt is wrong and a situation which encourages presumption of guilt is unjust. This is just the plain truth. Therefore, if the present situation re "administrative leave" tends, usually, to encourage presumption of guilt (no matter what the bishops say) it is wrong. Another method of dealing with such cases must be found.