Lifesitenews.com interviewed Fr. Frank and then summarized much of what has happened to him and the Diocese in the last few months. It’s worth reading that article. The Diocese, as usual, tries to make no comment and avoid making public what they’ve done. We’ve seen this before and would like to make a few comments. Just as they did with the Transgender Process they like to operate behind the scenes because they do things they shouldn’t be doing. They’re really concerned about Hillary Clinton’s reputation and in order to protect it Fr. Joe Corel threatens to destroy Fr. Frank’s reputation. Watch how they try to hide the way in which they use threats to keep priests in line with their agenda while claiming the priests won’t talk to the Bishop:
The diocese said questions on Father Corel’s threatened canonical rebuke and Father Frank’s status “pertain to internal conversations between Fr. Frank and his Bishop’s delegate.”
“We believe it is not appropriate to make public comment on such communications,” the diocese said in a statement. “Fr. Frank is welcome to bring any matters he wishes to discuss to the Bishop. At the present time, he has not chosen to do so.”
There was no conversation and you can tell that because Fr. Joe didn’t feel that he needed to listen to Fr. Frank’s side of the story but rather left his demands and threats on a voicemail. Furthermore how can they use the word “conversations” but also state that Fr. Frank has not chosen to speak to them? Logically it can’t be both ways. In fact, as any parent who called the Chancery found out, they refuse to dialogue with anyone they disagree with. Furthermore, and this is where Fr. Corel’s hypocrisy comes out, their threat is a “canonical rebuke.” We imagine in our minds a letter coming in the mail solely to Fr. Frank but what they mean is that they will publish something that harms Fr. Frank’s reputation and they will make it vague but serious sounding so that rumors can fly. In this day and age the rumors are often that the priest is a sexual abuser but either way when they ruin a priest’s reputation they are not using INTERNAL conversations but rather publicly defaming the priest and doing so after not speaking with him in person. The same applies to refusing to let him say Mass in some parishes, they should have a solid statement one way or the other about his status in the Diocese when asked (that’s their job) but instead they quietly ruin his reputation with other priests while never speaking to him on the matter. If Bishop Gaydos and Fr. Joe Corel suddenly feel that Fr. Frank is unfit to say Mass who exactly should contact whom? These men are so attached to their vendetta though that they would rather state “No Comment” and look suspicious than state that he is in good standing and thus by default let him say Mass in other parishes. They absolutely do not back down for any reason.
Do you understand what they are doing to good priests? Can you see how they publicize matters they shouldn’t and refuse to publicize matters that they should? Their lack of communication also extends to many lay people, often stonewalling people for years. Bishop Gaydos and Fr. Joe Corel have sown unjustly damaged reputations. They’ll probably reap what they have sown except it will be their own justly damaged reputations.