Fr. Corapi: "Soft you; a word or two before you go"

It has never been my intention to comment much on l'affaire Corapi.  We simply don't know enough about the facts surrounding the case to comment intelligently about it.  However, one theme that has run through the various communiques issued by the Corapi camp has been about the ecclesial process looking into the matter.  Essentially, and variously, the process has been described as lacking transparency, as being fundamentally flawed, and even "of the devil" and so on.  While I don't know the facts of the case, I do have some familiarity with the process, and want to comment on it briefly.  I do so out of concern over many of Corapi's "fans" who are now vilifying and demonizing "the bishops" and their process.

Let me begin with full disclosure: I was a member of the USCCB's senior staff for more than five years (2002-2007), and a consultant to the USCCB before that and since.  It is in this capacity that I offer some observations.

1) I readily acknowledge that no human legal process is without flaws, and I'm not suggesting here that the process being followed is flawless or perfect.  On the other hand, it has good points as well.

2) Despite innuendo and even some statements otherwise, this matter is NOT subject to the so-called "Dallas Charter" which address clergy sex abuse cases dealing with children, and vulnerable adults.  So, there should be clarity here: Whatever is going on with Corapi vis-a-vis this particular case -- which as I understand it deals with the claims of an adult woman against Corapi -- it does not involve the Dallas Charter and its provisions.  So, discussions which suggest otherwise are grossly inaccurate and should be discounted.

3) So, what process IS being invoked?  Rather simple, actually: it is the process contained in the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church (the Eastern Catholic Churches have their own Code of Canons).  When a cleric is accused of a crime, he is subject both to ecclesial law ("Canon Law") and to civil law.  The legislator for a cleric is either his bishop (if he is a diocesan deacon or presbyter) or his religious superior (if he is a member of a religious order).  When religious orders minister within a particular diocese, of course, they do so under the authority of the diocesan bishop.  For example, if the bishop has asked the Franciscans to staff a particular parish in the diocese, the Franciscan superior will make the actual assignment (he'll pick the priest to be assigned), but the priest will be responsible both to his own superior and also to the diocesan bishop.

4) Now, I'm not too clear about Corapi's arrangement.  (I was never aware of him until this whole thing broke in the news.)  However, what I'm told is that he was not living in community with this order (SOLT), and so I must presume that his religious superior had agreed with whatever arrangement was in place, and of course, the diocesan bishop would be informed of it, and have to agree with it, as well, especially if he was functioning as a presbyter in the parishes of the diocese.  The local bishop would extend faculties (authority) to exercise priestly ministry within the diocese, and so on.

5) Now comes the complaint.  Ultimately, the religious superior is the responsible person, and it appears that the complaint was given to the diocesan bishop, who took the steps he needed to, and then referred the rest of it to the superior for HIS action.  When a complaint is levied, an investigation is made.  It is not uncommon to ask the cleric (presbyter or deacon) to step away from ministry until the investigation is complete and the disposition made.  This, of course, is not a question of "presuming guilt" in the matter; it's simply prudential judgment pending the outcome of the case.  While it's not a perfect analogy, it's not unlike what happens when a police officer is suspected or accused of wrongdoing; or sometimes just when he discharges his or her weapon in the line of duty.  Such an officer is suspended from duty pending the outcome of the investigation; if everything is found to be in order, he is returned to duty.  THE REASON FOR THIS IS TO ENSURE THE CONTINUED SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY, not to "presume guilt" of the officer.

Similarly, the bishop/superior's main concern must be the CONTINUED SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY pending the conclusion of the investigation.  So, the priest or deacon is asked to step aside from ministry for the good of the community; if he refuses to do so voluntarily, he may be temporarily suspended, exactly as in the case of the police officer.  Again, it's about the safety of the community.  Once the investigation is complete, and if there's no problem, the suspension is lifted, he "gets his badge back," and returns to serving the community.

6) Now, what has happened in the Corapi case?  It appears that, hurt and wounded as he surely is, Fr. Corapi has decided to forego the investigation altogether and simply walk away.  No one has asked him to leave the priesthood, nor as any religious superior sought (yet) to have him returned to the lay state.  All of this seems to be HIS decision, not ecclesial authority.  To use my secular analogy: it would be the same as if the suspended police officer simply decided not to wait for the end of the investigation, and he or she just resigned from the police force altogether.  Again, HIS initiative, not the Chief of Police's decision.

Is this a perfect system?  Of course not.  But I don't see anything in the facts made available to us that suggest the process is in any way unusual or inappropriate.  I know that Corapi and his fans are hurting, but in their pain, they should not perpetuate further damage to the Body of Christ.

Oremus pro invicem -- Let us pray for each other.

Fr. Corapi speaks: “I’m not going to be involved in ministry as a priest anymore…”

Fr. Corapi speaks: “I’m not going to be involved in ministry as a priest anymore…”

Deacon Greg Kandra, and many others, have now reported on the latest developments in the Corapi matter.

No matter where you fall on your opinion of this man, it is time now to pray for everyone concerned. In particular, we should be praying for the many people who placed so much faith in his ministry. They are finding all of this quite devastating.

Let us pray. . . .

Some of my former students, now brother deacons

The news is eveywhere: new deacons being ordained in the Dioceses of Pittsburgh, Venice, Atlanta and elsewhere.  Here's still another!  Bishop John Noonan ordained five new deacons this morning for the Diocese of Orlando.  I highlight them especially, since I was privileged to be one of their professors of Theology during the academic component of their formation. 

So, to my new brothers Israel Colon, George Ferraioli, Mark King, Scott Lindeman, and Bill Timmes: Congratulations, and ad multos annos!

More on Kansas City-St. Joseph and the Diaconate

As a much lighter sidebar to my last posting, there is an interesting tidbit of diaconal history with the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph.

The first (permanent) deacon ordained in the United States following the diaconate's renewal by Pope Paul VI in 1967 was Michael Cole, who was ordained by then-bishop Fulton Sheen for the Diocese of Rochester, NY on 1 June 1969.  Unfortunately, Deacon Cole soon returned to his former ministry as Canon (Father) Michael Cole of the Anglican Communion, eventually pastoring a parish in Canada.  The next ordination of a (permanent) deacon was that of Paul McArdle, who was ordained in the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph by Bishop Charles H. Helmsing on 24 May 1970.  Paul, a true pioneer of the renewed diaconate, died last year.

You may read more about this remarkable man here.

An Agonizing Decision in Kansas City-St. Joseph

My good friend and brother Deacon Greg Kandra reports on the recent decision of a candidate for ordination to the diaconate to decline ordination.  Read about it on "The Deacon's Bench" here.  In summary, the candidate in question agonized over the decision to "promise respect and obedience" to Bishop Robert Finn and his successors; such a promise is made by every candidate for diaconal ordination, and even under the best of conditions this is a most profound and challenging promise to make!  Given the recent scandals in the diocese, and Bishop Finn's own admission of negligence in reporting recent cases of abuse by a particular priest of the diocese, an open-ended promise of "respect and obedience" to this particular bishop and all future unnamed and as yet unknown holders of that office, becomes particularly challenging.

Of course there is much involved here, and we can spend a lot of time going over it if people wish.  First, there is the theological understanding of "obedience" which is quite different from the more common understanding we hear every day.  Second, we can reflect on the nature of the relationship between the bishop and his clergy, and third, the presence and action of the Holy Spirit working in and through the bishop, the ordinand and the entire church.  In other words, this is so much more than someone promising some kind of "blind obedience."

In the deacon candidate's letter to his fellow parishioners, he refers to the fact that he is not going to be able to "respond to the call to orders which he had received."  Many comments have been posted on Deacon Greg's blog and I'm sure elsewhere which take the candidate to task for not responding to God's call.  As I tried to explain, though, this is highly technical and canonical (legal) language.  Here's what I wrote:

I will not enter into the substance of this debate, other than to say that I applaud the man’s decision. This isn’t a question of ex opere operato or anything else. Consider the way the ritual flows at ordination. The candidates are first questioned, and they respond AS A GROUP. But then comes this last question, and the liturgical action changes. Each candidate steps forward individually, kneels in front of his bishop, places his hands in the bishop’s, and promises respect and obedience to the bishop and all of his successors in office. It is a profoundly PERSONAL moment between bishop and candidate. If the man cannot, after wrestling with all of the issues in the crucible of his conscience, make such a promise, he is right not to do so.

But the main reason I’m chiming in is to give a technical response to the question, “From whom does the call to orders come?”

Overall, of course, the call comes from God, AS DISCERNED BY COMPETENT CHURCH AUTHORITY. Both aspects are necessary. I can’t simply say, “God is calling me to be a , , , and that’s all I need.” But what the candidate in THIS case is saying is technically quite different.

See, shortly before ordination, the ordaining bishop will issue a formal document known as a “Call to Orders”; it is what officially informs the candidate that he’s supposed to show up at the ordination ceremony. For example, when I was ordained in 1990 by Cardinal James Hickey for the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, my wife and I went through our final round of interviews with him personally THE DAY BEFORE ORDINATION WAS SCHEDULED. At the end of those final interviews, the Cardinal opened his door, called in his photographer, and presented me with the official document calling me to orders. I was in the church the next day.

When I read the candidate’s letter in this case, it seemed perfectly clear to me that he was not speaking theologically or sacramentally but canonically: he had in fact received the official “Call to Orders” from Bishop Finn, but that he was not going to accept it.

Perhaps, in the future, he will.

So, what do you think?  Comments?  Questions?

Finally, at home in Monterey

Well, friends, it's been a long time between postings.  Last week, I moved into my new offices at the historic Diocese of Monterey, California.  I'll be doing a variety of things here, from teaching to supervising to, well, whatever the bishop wants me to do!  I finally got internet connectivity and so now I'm able to get back to the blog.

Monterey holds a special place in our hearts, since we lived here back in the late 1970's when I attended Russian language school here at the Defense Language Institute during my days in the Navy.  Yesterday I drove by the school and, of course, very little remains of those old buildings!  I've also been spending time at the Naval Postgraduate School, so I feel very much reconnected to my Navy roots.

So, what shall we talk about?  If anyone is reading this and has any suggestions, questions, or topics you'd like to discuss, reply to this post and we'll give it a go!

Seven of the twenty-one Franciscan missions founded along the California coast by Fr. Junipero Serra are located within the Diocese of Monterey.  In fact, one of them serves as the diocesan Cathedral, which is across the street from our diocesan offices.  Not a bad view, and with that I'll end this post.

Moving Out, Moving In. . . .

Sorry for the long delay in posting.  My last reflection was posting on the Easter Vigil, and I hope that everyone is having a transformative Easter season!  As we gradually experience this tranformation of new life, we here are living that transformation on many personal and professional levels as well, so the liturgy and life are truly wedded.

During Easter Week, I flew to Nashville to address the annual convention of the National Association of Deacon Directors (NADD), and had the chance to spend some time with a friend from college who is now the Bishop of Nashville, Bishop Dave Choby.  It was good to visit with him and to sip a little Jack Daniels and share a few stories from "the old days".  Then I flew home to assist and preach at the Baccalaureate Mass for the graduates, families, faculty and administration of Saint Leo University.  It was quite an honor to preach the Mass, presided over by Abbott Isaac Camacho, OSB, since this was my last official act as a member of the faculty of the University.

Actually, that's not quite true: the following day I taught my last graduate class for Saint Leo: the deacon candidates' class in the Diocese of Orlando.  And the highlight of that was a Mass with the candidate community, and again, I was privileged to preach.

This past week, then, I moved out of my University office (which was about half the size of the office depicted in this photo!), and my wife and I are packing up for our move to the Diocese of Monterey, California!  It will begin with a drive up to Charleston, SC, where I will spend the day with the diaconate community there, and then head out due West until we hit California!

So, keep us in prayer as we begin yet another chapter in our adventure of life and discipleship.  Now that the school year is ended, I'll be posting more regularly!