Skip to main content

Fr. Corapi's Order Finds Him Not "Fit for Ministry”

Fr. Corapi's order finds him guilty

Robstown, Texas, Jul 5, 2011 / 03:13 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Father John Corapi’s religious order has found him guilty of substance abuse, sexual activity and violating his promise of poverty.

A July 5 press release from the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT) said that while Fr. Corapi was involved in public ministry he had “sexual relations and years of cohabitation with a woman known to him, when the relationship began, as a prostitute.”

The investigative team also found that he “repeatedly abused alcohol and drugs,” “recently engaged in ‘sexting’ activity with one or more women in Montana,” and holds legal title “to over $1 million in real estate, numerous luxury vehicles, motorcycles, an ATV, a boat dock, and several motor boats.”

His religious order said it is concerned “Fr. Corapi is now misleading (many) individuals through his false statements and characterizations.”

“It is for these Catholics that SOLT, by means of this announcement, seeks to set the record straight.”

A fact-finding team created by the order “acquired information from Fr. Corapi’s emails, various witnesses and public sources,” in response to a signed letter from a woman who is well known to Fr. Corapi.

The Society said in the news release that Fr. Corapi, under his vow of obedience, has been ordered to “return home to the society’s regional office and take up residence there,” and to “dismiss the lawsuit he has filed against his accuser.”

The order added that its “prior direction to Father John Corapi not to engage in any preaching or teaching, the celebration of the sacraments or other public ministry continues.”

As the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity sought to carry out its investigation into the allegations against Fr. Corapi, it found that its fact-finding team was hindered by a civil lawsuit the priest had filed and by sweeping non-disclosure agreements he had negotiated with his accuser and other witnesses.

The civil lawsuit argued that his principal accuser had committed slander and breach of contract.

Fr. Corapi refused to dismiss the lawsuit and the team discovered many other contracts that prevented “key witnesses” from speaking.

“Many of these witnesses likely had key information about the accusations being investigated and declined to answer questions and provide documents,” the order said.

The fact-finding team was composed of a priest-canonist, a psychiatrist and a lawyer, two of whom were members of religious orders and one a lay Catholic.

The statement notes that two were men and one was a woman, all with a “national reputation and substantial experience in ecclesiastical processes related to priest disciplinary issues.”

Fr. Corapi expressed his desire to leave the Society and the priesthood in a June 17 statement. He said he felt he was being “unjustly accused,” and that “(t)here are certain persons in authority in the Church that want me gone, and I shall be gone.”

Fr. Corapi has not yet been released from his vows.

“Catholics should understand that SOLT does not consider Father John Corapi as fit for ministry,” the statement concluded.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...