Dear Mary:

It is not likely that John Corapi (we can no longer call him "Father") will be returning to active priesthood. He voluntarily asked for laicization. Plus, given his attitude and view of Church hierarchy I would be surprised if he ever wants to come back.

The effect of laicization (return to the lay state) is described in Canon Law:

Can. 291 Apart from the cases mentioned in can. 290, n. 1, the loss of the clerical state does not carry with it a dispensation from the obligation of celibacy, which is granted solely by the Roman Pontiff.

Can. 292 A cleric who loses the clerical state in accordance with the law, loses thereby the rights that are proper to the clerical state and is no longer bound by any obligations of the clerical state, without prejudice to can. 291. He is prohibited from exercising the power of order, without prejudice to can. 976. He is automatically deprived of all offices and roles and of any delegated power.

Once a priest has been laicized, either of his own wishes or imposed by his bishop, he cannot return to the clerical state except by "rescript of the Apostolic See" (Canon Law 293).

If I were the one in the Roman Curia charged with making the decision to allow Mr. Corapi to return to the clerical state,  I would be diligent to assure that standards for the priesthood are met in Mr. Corapi. Here are some of those Canonical Standards:

Can. 282 ß1 Clerics are to follow a simple way of life and avoid anything which smacks of worldliness.

ß2 Goods which they receive on the occasion of the exercise of an ecclesiastical office, and which are over and above what is necessary for their worthy upkeep and the fulfillment of all the duties of their state, they may well wish to use for the good of the Church and for charitable works.

Can. 285 ß1 Clerics are to shun completely everything that is unbecoming to their state, in accordance with the provisions of particular law.

ß2 Clerics are to avoid whatever is foreign to their state, even when it is not unseemly.

ß4 Without the permission of their Ordinary, they may not undertake the administration of goods belonging to lay people, or secular offices which involve the obligation to render an account. They are forbidden to act as surety, even concerning their own goods, without consulting their proper Ordinary. They are not to sign promissory notes which involve the payment of money but do not state the reasons for the payment.

Can. 286 Clerics are forbidden to practise commerce or trade, either personally or through another, for their own or another's benefit, except with the permission of the lawful ecclesiastical authority.

Can. 287 ß1 Clerics are always to do their utmost to foster among people peace and harmony based on justice.

In addition to these Canonical requirements for the behavior of a priest, he would be required to obey his superiors, whether that be a diocesan bishop or religious superior.

And, lastly I would have him spend some years in a cloistered monastery to learn not only obedience, but mortification and humility.

All this is moot since I am not the one to make such a decision. It also moot in that it is doubtful he would ever be considered for reinstatement.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary