Defenders of John Corapi, and they are legion, often note the many conversions he has effected by his preaching as proof of his virtue: ”You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.”
But the same was said when the allegations against Fr Maciel were first whispered. Note that I am not equating John Corapi with Fr Maciel, whose sins and crimes greatly overshadow whatever Mr Corapi has been accused of. I am merely pointing out that a successful apostolate does necessarily prove anything about moral character. Few people who quote Christ to this effect bother to quote what He said immediately after: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ ’’
Prophesying, exorcism and “mighty works” all are “good fruit”, but in this instance the doers of such wondrous deeds perish.
In fact, Our Lord is a total opportunist; He will use any tool to save souls. If He did not the gospel never would have left Jerusalem, for every one of us is flawed. But let us be clear: when anyone is converted or healed or freed from demons it is not the “fruit” of the preacher, healer or exorcist. It is the fruit of the Spirit. The message of Christ and His grace have an intrinsic power, regardless of the sinfulness of the bearer of that message and that grace. 
This is not to judge John Corapi; we really do not know anything except what he has revealed, and that is hardly disinterested. Maybe in time we will be able to piece the truth together, maybe not. At this point those in charge of the investigation have been silent. Indeed, Mr Corapi has consistently jumped the gun during this whole sad affair. The charges against him only became public knowledge because then- Father Corapi chose to make them known. He could have just taken a sabbatical, as he had done in the past, and then resumed his ministry if he had been cleared or protested his innocence if he had not.
And he could have, instead of issuing his strange video missive, waited until his (former) religious community and the bishop investigating the matter had released statements. It is hard not to see this pattern as a preemptive maneuver, an attempt to spin the story ahead of those in authority over him.
So instead he bizarrely emerges as Super Black Wonder Dog, or whatever, ready to take on the forces of darkness.
One doesn’t have to be a prophet to foresee that this is going to sow strife and division in the Body of Christ. How Mr Corapi thinks this antic is going to serve the Church he professes to love is beyond me.
John Corapi says he is a sheep dog. Right now he looks more like a lone wolf.
I once heard Fr. Fessio speak, and met him when he came to my place of work. This was before his “break-up” with Tom Monaghan and he was drooling over all the good works he and Monaghan were a part of, even at one part saying, without sarcasm and in utter seriousness, that Monaghan was buying his way to heaven. Having met both of them because of work I did at the time, when they did “break-up” it was of no surprise, it is hard to imagine two bigger egos.
But what disturbed me most hearing Fessio speak was not Fessio, disturbing as he was. It was his fans. I could not believe how they ate up and even seemed to delight in Fessio’s completely over the top arrogance, condescension, self-righteousness, messiah complex and the like. It was an image that struck me as what it must have been like to watch crowds swooning over some fascist leader – these people were so desperate for a “strong man” personality to take up their furious work of institutional “purity” and a return to right tradition and all that. It was more than disturbing, it was scary. I think some of these fans of his would have followed the man straight into hell given a chance.
This whole Corapi incident, and the rhetoric used by his devoted fans, reminds me of what I saw at that Fessio event. It is creepy. Are people not aware that one can be completely “correct” theologically, and “successful” at conveying that truth, and still have a heart given over to Satan? How many Fr Maciels must we see before people accept the obvious? I had a professor in bible college, a man who did not fit in there at all, who used to remind us that Satan was The Accuser and that his accusations against us at our individual judgments would be accurate accusations, and that his demands that God act against our sins will be just demands – Satan is sort of the patron saint of the “righteous cause” demanding that we correct things. I’ve given too much of my life over to that sort of thing already and if I had more sense would avoid anything that reeks of such indignation. So I have no business condemning Corapi – in lesser instances, I’ve been Corapi.
At the time I saw and met Fessio the priest I was closest to in my life was this Paulist on leave from the Paulists who lived near my wife and I and became a great friend to us – the three of us would go to German restaurants and drink beer and eat sausage and tell stories. He was a wonderful man, Fr. J. He was an interesting duck too – too conservative for the Paulists (he once got in trouble, I kid not, for being the one straight priest at one of his assignments in the Paulist world), but certainly way too liberal for the likes of Fessio of Corapi. But the thing about Fr. J is that he had no agenda. He wasn’t trying to change the Church. He was a simple workaday priest who did is job and didn’t make much of it. My priest now is of a similar bent – he is more conservative than Fr. J, does the Latin Mass even, but he is not crusading for his conservatism. He is sort of ho-hum about it – here it is if you want it, take it or leave it. The Fessios and Corapis remind me of how good it is to have a priest who does these important things without putting on the airs of self-importance. Quotidian priests are the best.
What you say about the Paulists speaks volumes about the ordination of Robert Sirico, who was deeply involved in the homosexual culture for a decade before the Paulists ordained him. And let us not forget their origins, founded by Isaac Hecker, architect of the Americanist heresy.
Hi Owen, I haven’t seen you in a long time now and I’m gathering from what I read here that you are Catholic now? AMDG, Janet Cupo
Janet – I have returned to the Catholic Church. Yes. Good to hear from you and all the best.
Thanks. I was looking through some old pictures the other day and found one of a baby taken in my living room. It took me a minute to figure out whose it was, but it was your daughter.
AMDG
What Owen said. I have had it with religious celebrities, religious movements, and all that drama. My local parish is pretty dysfunctional, but it’s a haven of normalcy compared with the world of religious celebs with their cult followings.
Because we don’t have cable or the dish, I have had very limited exposure to Fr. Corapi. So, I have no idea whether he changed over the years, or whether he was always taking us for a ride, as Sarah suggests below. No idea. But I am beginning to get the sense that celebrity corrupts even more easily than power does. (Of course the two are related.)
What a weird few weeks it has been. Lord, can we just get back to normal now???
Certainly priests all have different personalities, and in the case of Corapi, a deterministic one. I just hope the man cools down, and decides to back away from the Black sheep, Sheep dog, angle. A lamb locked in a pen might have been better, asking for everyone to pray that our Lord open the gate.. But by doing what he has chosen to do, then he has forever lost any hope of returning to active ministry. It seems too knee-jerkish to me, but then that is the man’s personality. He, I believe, was a lawyer in his earlier life, so there is obviously an ulterior motive to this approach, but I’ve yet to figure that out.
The man needs many prayers.
No, he wasn’t a lawyer, he was a realtor.
Those drug allegations are making sense, no? Actually, they made sense when I watched a video of him speaking, and I thought “Man, that dude looks stoned”.
“Are people not aware that one can be completely ‘correct’ theologically, and ‘successful’ at conveying that truth, and still have a heart given over to Satan?”
No. Many people think doctrine is truth, and never even ask about love.
Also not true. Ideology doesn’t get you very far, even if it is peppered with the PC version of progressive LUV.
That many people think doctrine is truth is empirically verifiable, if anyone wants to go through the exercise.
I agree, though, that ideology doesn’t get you very far. Including the ideologies that find mention of love incompatible with Catholicism.
Tom K, you raise an interesting point.
We had a squishy-liberal elderly Jesuit pastor (now deceased) who broke every liturgical rule in the book and tolerated stuff he maybe shouldn’t have. But he was very loving and pastoral, and just about everyone loved him. He had spent 20 years in India running a Jesuit center for the victims of Hansen’s disease. According to visting Jesuits who had worked with him there, he would go out into the jungle looking for these people — the ones whose disease was so advanced that their relatives had cast them off — and he would tenderly carry them back to the center and treat each one like Christ Himself.
Well, then, in the same Vicariate, we had a priest who was perfectly correct and orthodox but treated people like cr*p. I won’t go into all the details, but I can cite one instance: He reduced one of my friends to hysterical sobbing after he humiliated her in front of a group of parishioners. And this is a lady who is as tough as nails and normally never cries. Just one example. Many, many more could be cited.
So, which would I rather have — the squishy-liberal pastor who knows how to love or the orthodox one who doesn’t? I think the former.
You should know damn well that it doesn’t always come down that way in polar extremes. There are conservative clerics that would give you the shirt off their own backs, as well as progressive clergy who’d just soon see you drop dead as take the next breath. Not to mention all the hardworking priests someplace in the middle who are trying their darndest just to do the work of God and mostly doing a passing job of it. This political crap is just that: crap, and I’m tired of it.
Yes, I agree. I was going to add something about that but I was too tired (up way too late). Yes, a priest can be both orthodox and pastoral. And many are. I’m just talking about some of my experiences in our Vicariate over the past 20 years. :)
Well actually I’d rather have an orthodox priest who is loving as well…but I think I knew that Jesuit myself.
“Right now he looks more like a lone wolf.”
Wasn’t he always?
When you read through the threads at the Patheos blogs – the Anchoress and the Deacon’s Bench – there are folks – especially a person with the monikker JKM who are posting interesting factoids related to Corapi’s living arrangements and claims about his CV even beyond the persistent questions about his military record. He claimed to have been employed by the Sacramento Archdiocese (or diocese?) …but never was. And so on. Questions about his celebration of the sacraments – did he ever do it? And finally – the most interesting tidbit that he trademarked “The Black Sheep Dog” in April of 2010.
Therese- I also have questioned his story. I’d like to see just one interview with an aging starlet that remembers partying on his yacht, or cruising in his Ferrari.
And rich people don’t become homeless from doing drugs; if you are a millionaire you can handle even a very expensive drug habit.
And of course there are people who remember him telling tales of combat and claiming to have been a Green Beret (he had some special forces training but didn’t cut it and ended up at a desk job).
I have never been able to listen to more than a minute of two of his preaching, as my bullshitometer starts flashing pretty quickly. And note that this had nothing to do with his message, which was (selectively) orthodox….
Thanks for this post – sanity at last. God bless!