Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Viva Cristo Rey on March 01, 2023, 03:41:15 PM
-
Father Ripperger has some really good material on the Catholic Faith. (Please no negative posts.)
https://tinyurl.com/4nhpjcz4
-
Father Ripperger has some really good material on the Catholic Faith. (Please no negative posts.)
https://tinyurl.com/4nhpjcz4
.
Fr. Ripperger is an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest who promotes superstition and whose sermons sound like a chapter in a Harry Potter novel.
-
I disagree with Yeti. (Sorry, guy! ⛄️) Nothing personal intended. I’d prefer he were conditionally re-ordained, but don’t believe a lay person can judge in the internal forum in such matters. His sermons, conferences, and books are largely quite good. He is obviously well-educated in the Faith. The one matter on which I agree in part is that some of his material do border on superstition, or can lead one to think in such a way. Let’s say that someone who is already superstitious, overly timid, paranoid, or too scrupulous could get themselves in spiritual confusion if they don’t have a good spiritual director to guide them.
On the basics of spiritual warfare, Fr. Ripperger is an excellent resource, IMO.
-
Fr. Ripperger is an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest who promotes superstition and whose sermons sound like a chapter in a Harry Potter novel.
I'd have to agree on all counts. I used to like him in general, considered him a decent Thomist, except his attitude toward demonology has always rubbed me the wrong way. I could never quite figure out why ... until I had to think deeply about it on that one thread some time ago, almost entirely as the result of some posts you made there.
-
I disagree with Yeti. (Sorry, guy! ⛄️) Nothing personal intended. I’d prefer he were conditionally re-ordained, but don’t believe a lay person can judge in the internal forum in such matters. His sermons, conferences, and books are largely quite good. He is obviously well-educated in the Faith. The one matter on which I agree in part is that some of his material do border on superstition, or can lead one to think in such a way. Let’s say that someone who is already superstitious, overly timid, paranoid, or too scrupulous could get themselves in spiritual confusion if they don’t have a good spiritual director to guide them.
On the basics of spiritual warfare, Fr. Ripperger is an excellent resource, IMO.
Well, the validity of one's ordination is not a matter of the "internal forum". There is a certain amount of disagreement that could be had, but it has nothing to do with judging the internal forum. SOME of his sermons and conferences are good. But he's famous and most well known for his demonology, and it's seriously problematic ... and very dangerous. His demonology of "lay deliverance" is extremely Protestant, and the notion that lay people can command demons needs to be rejected completely.
-
I do not think Fr. Ripperger teaches that lay people may directly command demons. I agree, that is thoroughly Protestant and specifically Pentecostal. It’s dangerous. I had a roommate who went to a Pentecostal church and she died just before her 35th birthday because her “deliverance” group that included her fiancé had her believing that the “demon of diabetes” had been cast out. All she had to do was have the faith to “claim” her healing. She did this by throwing out her insulin and supplies. She ruptured an aneurysm in her brain and died in her sleep.
Lay people shouldn’t even dabble in exorcism or “deliverance” except under the direct guidance of a qualified priest.
-
.
Fr. Ripperger is an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest who promotes superstition and whose sermons sound like a chapter in a Harry Potter novel.
Someone on Twitter referred to him once as a "Novus Ordo Witch doctor" :laugh2:
In charity, he does some good. He is a decent Thomist, as Lad said, and he has brought attention to the danger of the demonic. But, the way he handles it is dangerous in itself and his prayers for laymen have brought nothing but evil in my own experience, and in that of others I've spoken to on Twitter.
His holy orders are also in doubt, since he was "ordained" by a NO "bishop". I'd have more confidence in the commands of the pseudo-Christian, Orthodox-consecrated bishop from Ghost Adventures than Ripperger.
-
I do not think Fr. Ripperger teaches that lay people may directly command demons.
It was covered in this thread:
https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/warning-avoid-ripperger's-prayers-adjuring-demons/
-
I do not think Fr. Ripperger teaches that lay people may directly command demons. I agree, that is thoroughly Protestant and specifically Pentecostal. It’s dangerous. I had a roommate who went to a Pentecostal church and she died just before her 35th birthday because her “deliverance” group that included her fiancé had her believing that the “demon of diabetes” had been cast out. All she had to do was have the faith to “claim” her healing. She did this by throwing out her insulin and supplies. She ruptured an aneurysm in her brain and died in her sleep.
Lay people shouldn’t even dabble in exorcism or “deliverance” except under the direct guidance of a qualified priest.
That's nuts!! I can't stand that kind of thinking (or lack of).
The FIRST thing I thought of when I read that was the old Steven Segal parody. "There's always that one guy!"
https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=w_l-4rAUAzQ
-
Link doesn't work here,
use this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_l-4rAUAzQ&pp=ygUMc2VnYWwgbWFkIHR2
-
The red flag for me are his statements about what the demons are revealing. "The demons are telling us their time is almost up."
He is assuring everyone the demons know the "era of peace" is coming.
Demons lie.
Wouldn't demons love everyone to fall for the "era of peace" that appears to come with the arrival of the Antichrist?
-
Though I haven't seen Fr. Ripperger's prayer book, his book Dominion has a whole chapter about authority. Basically, he says that among laity, authority is within the family: father over wife and minor children, and I think he explains a qualified authority of the wife toward the husband in the sacramental reciprocity of marriage (not to get too far into detail there). A mother's authority over her minor children in effect is delegated to her in a limited sense by her husband. Grandparents have no authority over grandchildren unless delegated by their father, and adult children have no authority over their own parents. The 1962 Missal also includes several deliverance prayers for private use by laity. It would seem that within the family is when these would be allowable, yes?
Beyond the above, Fr. Ripperger says that no layperson should ever attempt to engage with demons afflicting any other person. Yet it's essential that one have self-authority with regard to demons, otherwise an exorcist would be blocked by the affected person's non-cooperation.
The group that calls itself "Catholic" but is dangerously Prot-friendly is Neil Lozano's "Unbound" or "Heart of the Father" -- definitely stay away from them. They don't even acknowledge Our Lady nor any of the Saints.
-
Though I haven't seen Fr. Ripperger's prayer book, his book Dominion has a whole chapter about authority. Basically, he says that among laity, authority is within the family: father over wife and minor children, and I think he explains a qualified authority of the wife toward the husband in the sacramental reciprocity of marriage (not to get too far into detail there). A mother's authority over her minor children in effect is delegated to her in a limited sense by her husband. Grandparents have no authority over grandchildren unless delegated by their father, and adult children have no authority over their own parents. The 1962 Missal also includes several deliverance prayers for private use by laity. It would seem that within the family is when these would be allowable, yes?
Beyond the above, Fr. Ripperger says that no layperson should ever attempt to engage with demons afflicting any other person. Yet it's essential that one have self-authority with regard to demons, otherwise an exorcist would be blocked by the affected person's non-cooperation.
The group that calls itself "Catholic" but is dangerously Prot-friendly is Neil Lozano's "Unbound" or "Heart of the Father" -- definitely stay away from them. They don't even acknowledge Our Lady nor any of the Saints.
The strange thing about his stance on authority and the legalism of demons in that respect is that he published the deliverance prayers book before receiving the imprimatur.
-
I think I'll just stick to the St Michael prayer, thank you. I say it sometimes several times a day.
-
What cut it for me was his booklet The Merit of the Mass (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~aversa/modernism/Merit of the Mass (Fr. Ripperger, F.S.S.P.).pdf) in the beginning pages he says:
"In discussing the value of the Mass, one must make a distinction between intrinsic and the extrinsic value. The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is infinite since It is Christ, Who is infinite, Who is offered. Hence, in this respect every Mass has an infinite value. The new rite of Mass is just as efficacious as the old rite of Mass in this respect since they are both the same sacrifice of Christ..."
Why is he a trad priest when the bolded is his fundamental presupposition for the article?
-
What cut it for me was his booklet The Merit of the Mass (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~aversa/modernism/Merit of the Mass (Fr. Ripperger, F.S.S.P.).pdf) in the beginning pages he says:
"In discussing the value of the Mass, one must make a distinction between intrinsic and the extrinsic value. The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is infinite since It is Christ, Who is infinite, Who is offered. Hence, in this respect every Mass has an infinite value. The new rite of Mass is just as efficacious as the old rite of Mass in this respect since they are both the same sacrifice of Christ..."
Why is he a trad priest when the bolded is his fundamental presupposition for the article?
Because he's not truly a "trad priest"?
Quite honestly, I see no benefit from looking to Novus Ordo "priests" for anything. Steer clear.
-
I think I'll just stick to the St Michael prayer, thank you. I say it sometimes several times a day.
Same here. I've found that and the Pater most efficacious against temptations, and worked tremendously against the two actual demonic attacks I've suffered.
-
Quite honestly, I see no benefit from looking to Novus Ordo "priests" for anything. Steer clear.
THIS. I will never understand why so many Traditional Catholics listen to Fr. Rip or any other NO priest. They are members of a FALSE RELIGION. Worse than protestants.
-
What cut it for me was his booklet The Merit of the Mass (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~aversa/modernism/Merit of the Mass (Fr. Ripperger, F.S.S.P.).pdf) in the beginning pages he says:
"In discussing the value of the Mass, one must make a distinction between intrinsic and the extrinsic value. The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is infinite since It is Christ, Who is infinite, Who is offered. Hence, in this respect every Mass has an infinite value. The new rite of Mass is just as efficacious as the old rite of Mass in this respect since they are both the same sacrifice of Christ..."
Why is he a trad priest when the bolded is his fundamental presupposition for the article?
Did you even bother to read the article? He's talking about the ontological merit vs efficacious/subjective merit and comparing the two, that's the whole point of the article, and if you bothered to read it, you'd know exactly why he said that.
If you believe the NO is invalid in each and every case then it I can understand why you would be concerned, but from a purely ontological metaphysical perspective, they are exactly the same, in terms of sacrifice, the TLM and the NO, in that respect and only in that respect, not in any other, which he goes on to explain.
Again, if you had read the article, you wouldn't be so shocked.
-
THIS. I will never understand why so many Traditional Catholics listen to Fr. Rip or any other NO priest. They are members of a FALSE RELIGION. Worse than protestants.
He's literally never even said the Novus Ordo once. He's more traditional than a lot of priests I've met. This kind of talking doesn't do anyone any favors and only harbors malice towards a good priest. Calling him worse than a Protestant is basically calumny.
-
Did you even bother to read the article? He's talking about the ontological merit vs efficacious/subjective merit and comparing the two, that's the whole point of the article, and if you bothered to read it, you'd know exactly why he said that.
If you believe the NO is invalid in each and every case then it I can understand why you would be concerned, but from a purely ontological metaphysical perspective, they are exactly the same, in terms of sacrifice, the TLM and the NO, in that respect and only in that respect, not in any other, which he goes on to explain.
Again, if you had read the article, you wouldn't be so shocked.
No, I stopped at that point because I've seen the same error often enough to know the rest of the article was not for me.
Also, when he says: "The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is..." when what he means is "The intrinsic value of any valid consecration" only serves to confuse the issue and imo, does only harm.
-
Did you even bother to read the article? He's talking about the ontological merit vs efficacious/subjective merit and comparing the two, that's the whole point of the article, and if you bothered to read it, you'd know exactly why he said that.
If you believe the NO is invalid in each and every case then it I can understand why you would be concerned, but from a purely ontological metaphysical perspective, they are exactly the same, in terms of sacrifice, the TLM and the NO, in that respect and only in that respect, not in any other, which he goes on to explain.
Again, if you had read the article, you wouldn't be so shocked.
So he "prefers" the Latin Mass.
If they were exactly the same, they would both be Catholic. If they are both Catholic, then they would have exactly the same merit ontological and otherwise... and there would be no reason to not go to the new rite.
-
So he "prefers" the Latin Mass.
If they were exactly the same, they would both be Catholic. If they are both Catholic, then they would have exactly the same merit ontological and otherwise... and there would be no reason to not go to the new rite.
Again... THIS. If NO priests are valid and the new rite is a Catholic mass, and supposedly according to Jorge Bergoglio it is the unique expression of the Church, we should all be there attending the NO on Sundays.
At least with protestants I know they aren't Catholic. NO priests and Indult priests are not Catholic priests and they do not practice the Catholic religion. I stand by my statements. They are deceivers and leading souls to hell.
-
Sorry, but you guys clearly don't understand what ontology is in St. Thomas. I'm not going to continue discussing something you clearly are not educated on, while telling me I'm wrong. Being belligerent and incapable of making Thomistic metaphysical ontology distinctions in cases like this is one of the reasons for the crisis in the Church.
You didn't read the article, He didn't say they were the same, they are vastly different by degree. A Satanic mass is still valid, that doesn't mean you should attend or go. Though ontologically speaking there is a valid sacrifice. That's the distinction he makes. If you fail to understand that according to Thomistic principles and metaphysics, that's your problem, not his.
-
Sorry, but you guys clearly don't understand what ontology is in St. Thomas. I'm not going to continue discussing something you clearly are not educated on, while telling me I'm wrong. Being belligerent and incapable of making Thomistic metaphysical ontology distinctions in cases like this is one of the reasons for the crisis in the Church.
You didn't read the article, He didn't say they were the same, they are vastly different by degree. A Satanic mass is still valid, that doesn't mean you should attend or go. Though ontologically speaking there is a valid sacrifice. That's the distinction he makes. If you fail to understand that according to Thomistic principles and metaphysics, that's your problem, not his.
You throw nonsensical phrases out there like "Thomistic metaphysical ontology distinctions" that indicate you don't even know what these words mean. You just string a bunch of them together because it somehow sounds good, and then claiming that you're "educated on" it while everyone else is not.
-
I do not think Fr. Ripperger teaches that lay people may directly command demons. I agree, that is thoroughly Protestant and specifically Pentecostal.
Yes, Father does teach that. So, his spin on it is the assertion (that cannot be demonstrated from Traditional Catholic theology ... and is based on a misreading of St. Alphonsus, as we dealt with on another thread) that lay people can command demons where it comes to people who are under their authority. So, he'll say that a father can command demons to depart from his wife and children, since the wife and children are under his authority.
Father's error is that this does not, however, mean that the demons are under his authority. He can command those under his authority, but cannot command the demons, who are not. I own a car and see a thief trying to steal it. I issue a command to the thief to stop, since I own the car. Not only is he under no obligation to comply, but he could decide to take it out on me for trying to stop him. There's absolutely no reason we can't ask Our Lady, the Terror of Demons, or St. Michael or our guardian angels to ward off the demons. We can even ask the guardian angels of those under our authority to respect our authority. They will do so because they respect God's authority, which is the same authority we exercise over our children, etc. But demons will only comply if they're forced to by God or by those who have authority over them through the Church, i.e. exorcists.
This notion of "Deliverance" is utterly Protestant and is based on the Protestant notion regarding a priesthood of all believers. In fact, since there's no Tradition for Catholic "Deliverance", Father Ripperger had to take Prot deliverance prayers and modify them to make them more consistent with Catholic doctrine.
-
The red flag for me are his statements about what the demons are revealing. "The demons are telling us their time is almost up."
He is assuring everyone the demons know the "era of peace" is coming.
Demons lie.
Wouldn't demons love everyone to fall for the "era of peace" that appears to come with the arrival of the Antichrist?
Absolutely demons lie. That is the reason that St. Alphonsus and St. Thomas state that it's a grave sin for an exorcist to engage in such conversations with the demons ... except if they're moved by some very clear divine inspiration (such as a saint here or there may have been). Yet Father Ripperger is constantly reporting on these various "conversations" with demons.
-
I had a roommate who went to a Pentecostal church and she died just before her 35th birthday because her “deliverance” group that included her fiancé had her believing that the “demon of diabetes” had been cast out.
If you look at Father Ripperger's prayers, he has very similar lists of demons, the demon of this, the demon of that. He gives the distinct impression that all evils and all hardships in life are caused by demons, leaving very little room for natural conditions. So, for instance, he's attributed people who have financial hardships to demons attacking them. Really? Perhaps God is allowing these hardships. In fact, even IF it's a demon doing it, it's only because God has allowed it, i.e. willed that the person experience these hardships, as St. Francis de Sales indicated. He advised ignoring demons rather than attempting to confront them, having confidence that they can do no more than what God allows. He likened a demon to a dog on a chain (a chain put there by God). They're all bark and no bite ... except if you approach the dog. So he advised ignoring them. Father Ripperger advises confronting them, investigating and praying to find out their "names" etc. It's incredibly dangerous and contrary to what the saints have Traditionally told us about such matters.
While Father Ripperger is a decent Thomist, traditionally-minded in a lot of ways, it's obvious that he's made a name for himself through the demonology. He's become a celebrity precisely because he deals with subjects that inflame the curiosity of people with itchy ears looking for interesting / novel things. That's not a good sign.
-
Though I haven't seen Fr. Ripperger's prayer book, his book Dominion has a whole chapter about authority. Basically, he says that among laity, authority is within the family: father over wife and minor children, and I think he explains a qualified authority of the wife toward the husband in the sacramental reciprocity of marriage (not to get too far into detail there). A mother's authority over her minor children in effect is delegated to her in a limited sense by her husband. Grandparents have no authority over grandchildren unless delegated by their father, and adult children have no authority over their own parents. The 1962 Missal also includes several deliverance prayers for private use by laity. It would seem that within the family is when these would be allowable, yes?
Beyond the above, Fr. Ripperger says that no layperson should ever attempt to engage with demons afflicting any other person. Yet it's essential that one have self-authority with regard to demons, otherwise an exorcist would be blocked by the affected person's non-cooperation.
The group that calls itself "Catholic" but is dangerously Prot-friendly is Neil Lozano's "Unbound" or "Heart of the Father" -- definitely stay away from them. They don't even acknowledge Our Lady nor any of the Saints.
No. Having authority over one's family does not translate into having authority over the demons who might be afflicting them. There are no "deliverance prayers" in any 1962 Missal. There are imprecatory prayers to Our Lady and St. Michael, but there is zero precedent for prayers where the laity issue commands to demons.
-
I think I'll just stick to the St Michael prayer, thank you. I say it sometimes several times a day.
THIS^^^. And pray to Our Lady, the Terror of Demons, whose mere presence causes them to flee in terror. Pray the Rosary. Use the Sacramentals of the Church, which are very powerful to drive them away. And if we have authority over our children, we can pray to their guardian angels to ward off the demons since we have an authority over the children.
Who's more powerful, Our Lady and the angels and the Sacramentals of the Church ... or some chump issuing commands from a deliverance book?
-
What cut it for me was his booklet The Merit of the Mass (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~aversa/modernism/Merit of the Mass (Fr. Ripperger, F.S.S.P.).pdf) in the beginning pages he says:
"In discussing the value of the Mass, one must make a distinction between intrinsic and the extrinsic value. The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is infinite since It is Christ, Who is infinite, Who is offered. Hence, in this respect every Mass has an infinite value. The new rite of Mass is just as efficacious as the old rite of Mass in this respect since they are both the same sacrifice of Christ..."
Why is he a trad priest when the bolded is his fundamental presupposition for the article?
Not only this, but he's given sermons where he's slandered Traditional Catholics, derided them as Pharisaical, judgmental, and at one point suggesting that they're more prone to impurity than Novus Ordites (completely false). He claims to have gleaned the latter from hearing Confessions, but ignore the fact that Novus Ordites tend not to go to Confession at all. Why is it that at parishes with thousands of families around me, the same 3-4 people show up every week at their 30-minute Confession time on Saturday afternoon? I get it that judgmentalism is a temptation among Traditional Catholics, but he bases this on criticizing the hierarchy and denounces legitimate criticisms, such as about Communion in the Hand, Liturgical abuses, and the New Mass. In other words, to denounce Communion in the Hand, which is legitimately evil, he categorizes as Pharisaical judgmentalism.
-
Not only this, but he's given sermons where he's slandered Traditional Catholics, derided them as Pharisaical, judgmental, and at one point suggesting that they're more prone to impurity than Novus Ordites (completely false). He claims to have gleaned the latter from hearing Confessions, but ignore the fact that Novus Ordites tend not to go to Confession at all. Why is it that at parishes with thousands of families around me, the same 3-4 people show up every week at their 30-minute Confession time on Saturday afternoon? I get it that judgmentalism is a temptation among Traditional Catholics, but he bases this on criticizing the hierarchy and denounces legitimate criticisms, such as about Communion in the Hand, Liturgical abuses, and the New Mass. In other words, to denounce Communion in the Hand, which is legitimately evil, he categorizes as Pharisaical judgmentalism.
I mean, are some not? I've come across many pharisaical and judgmental TradCaths both here and elsewhere. The stereotype had to have come from somewhere, and it does seem to be more common among the NovoCons, which are those he deals with.
-
I enjoyed listening to one of Father Ripperger’s talks when he fondly mentions memories of his grandparents and how they lived a simple Catholic life.
-
Anyone here ever make or laugh at a joke or remark concerning novus ordo-ites? Then no condemnation for Fr. Ripperger! He’s right. Many trads DO have an air of superiority about them about how their strict adherence to all the rules of Catholicism. Conversely, people in the novus ordo brag about how open and welcoming they are, how happy and free they feel having let loose of the repressive, rigid, cruel rules of the Catholic Church of long ago. Both groups are wrong. In fact, they make the same mistake, they’re on opposites sides of the same wrong coin!
-
I believe the fundamental problem with Ripperger is that his intellect has been corrupted. He holds simultaneous contradictories in his mind.
His own words - not his voluminous quotes - but his own ideas and assertions, reveal a mind that is habituated to violations of the first principles of reason. Such intellectual degradation is the necessary effect when one simultaneously plays tradman and works assiduously to prop up the novus ordo imposture. You cannot hold both that the Catholic Church is the Catholic Church and that the novus ordo is the Catholic Church without frying your rational circuitry.
Ripperger's mind might be likened to a duality (schizoid). One track runs along the truth, especially through the prism of St. Thomas. The other track runs along the novus ordo falsity. These tracks seem to run parallel to each other, so that his intellect is never alerted to the violation of the first principles.
You ask yourself how he can be both so good and so bad at the same time. Maybe this explains it.
I think where he is his very best, is in his book on mental health, which is almost entirely the epistemology of St. Thomas. I'm studying it right now and it is doing me a world of good.
First of all, it is reintroducing into my own mind a large body of knowledge I first received by studying the Summa. Because I've already learned from St. Thomas, and because I recognize St. Thomas in Ripperger's work, I am able to benefit from what Ripperger does best - collate, organize, and summarize principles.
Secondly, this book satisfies a great societal need for a rational dismantling of fake jew pscholatry. One of the primary vectors by which neo-paganism entered into the culture is "modern psychology." This has mutilated and destroyed minds, bodies, and souls with pretty much the same efficiency as Vatican II. In fact, did not the VII apparatus destroy the vocations of countless religious by delivering them over to "psychoanalysts?"
In his book on true psychology, Ripperger presents to the world the literal antidote to this poison. Besides Christ and the Church, mankind needs this knowledge more than anything else.
I don't take the approach of categorically refusing to peruse the works of certain novus ordo operatives, on the sole basis of their being novus ordo. Some of them provide "victuals" here and there that are edible and even nourishing, provided one makes certain not to swallow the bones.
The vast majority of thinkers on this forum graze in the pastures of men like Ripperger; and that is a good thing. It's good to point out their errors, and it is good to point out the good they do.
Every single comment about the demonology niche Ripperger has carved out for himself is accurate and well taken. In fact, how do we know that he wasn't dragged into this fake exorcism ministry precisely because he is Thomistic and this would be a great way to make inroads into his mind. Or perhaps it's a great way to ever more firmly attach him to the novus ordo. He is human, and so he is susceptible to all manner of temptations that come with fame and notoriety. His prior compromise with VII had already unmoored him. This deliverance ministry BS might take him down in the end.
As I do consider him a benefactor of sorts, I pray for him. Wouldn't he be just grand if he finally unified and purified his intellect?
-
The problem with Fr. Ripperger, as with many of these so-called "traditional priests," is that he most likely has not read the three seminal works on the criticism of the New Mass: The Ottaviani Intervention (1969) by Cardinals Bacci and Ottaviani, The Great Sacrilege (1971) by Fr Wathen, and The Problems with the New Mass (1990) by Dr. Coomaraswamy.* All three of these works paint the New Mass as sinful and questionably valid.
Fr Ripperger should join the ranks of the late Bishop Lazo, the retired Philippine bishop, who lamented that he had followed "the Rome that was under the control of the Freemasons and Lucifer," and that he had said the New Mass, "a concoction of Monsignor Annibale Bugnini, a freemason." In fact, when I personally asked Bishop Lazo about the New Mass in 1997, at St Thomas Aquinas Seminary, he replied to me that he had read the book The Great Sacrilege, and that it had led him back to the True Mass. I have decided to post the Bishop Lazo Letter for those who have not read it:
http://archives.sspx.org/bishop_salvador_lazo/bishop_lazos_declaration_of_faith.htm (http://archives.sspx.org/bishop_salvador_lazo/bishop_lazos_declaration_of_faith.htm)
*I have some of the letters between Dr. Coomaraswamy and Mother Teresa, and, of course, Mother Teresa went right along with the New Mass while Dr. Coomaraswamy was losing some of his own family members to the New Mass.
-
One of Father Ripperger’s talks he advises Catholics on how to prepare for Confession. These talks about the Catholic Faith has helped us to grow in our faith.
-
Brownson, thank you for Letters of Bishop Lazo. I will read over them later.
-
One of Father Ripperger’s talks he advises Catholics on how to prepare for Confession.
This is basic, high-school level stuff. I'm sure he does a good job here.
Where Fr R is dangerous (because he "doesn't know what he doesn't know...and also because he's infected with V2 heresies) is on the more theological and doctrinal issues of the day. He can't be trusted here at all.
-
The problem with Fr. Ripperger, as with many of these so-called "traditional priests," is that he most likely has not read the three seminal works on the criticism of the New Mass: The Ottaviani Intervention (1969) by Cardinals Bacci and Ottaviani, The Great Sacrilege (1971) by Fr Wathen, and The Problems with the New Mass (1990) by Dr. Coomaraswamy.* All three of these works paint the New Mass as sinful and questionably valid.
Fr Ripperger should join the ranks of the late Bishop Lazo, the retired Philippine bishop, who lamented that he had followed "the Rome that was under the control of the Freemasons and Lucifer," and that he had said the New Mass, "a concoction of Monsignor Annibale Bugnini, a freemason." In fact, when I personally asked Bishop Lazo about the New Mass in 1997, at St Thomas Aquinas Seminary, he replied to me that he had read the book The Great Sacrilege, and that it had led him back to the True Mass. I have decided to post the Bishop Lazo Letter for those who have not read it:
http://archives.sspx.org/bishop_salvador_lazo/bishop_lazos_declaration_of_faith.htm (http://archives.sspx.org/bishop_salvador_lazo/bishop_lazos_declaration_of_faith.htm)
*I have some of the letters between Dr. Coomaraswamy and Mother Teresa, and, of course, Mother Teresa went right along with the New Mass while Dr. Coomaraswamy was losing some of his own family members to the New Mass.
I will add Fr. Cekada's "Work of Human Hands" to your list of books on the NOM.
-
I think a point that is overlooked is Fr. Ripperger's demographic is primarily conservative NewChurchers and people new to tradition. Possibly some Protestants who are considering the Catholic Faith. Those raised in Tradition from traditional families don't need conferences on masculine authority or the dangers of pop culture. He preaches to feminists (male and female)....are they in his audience? He must think so or he wouldn't address it. Why does he have an apostolate dedicated to deliverance (outside of his exorcism ministry)? Probably because he's speaking directly to worldlings who have spiritual problems due to demonic influence. He's not talking to me or most of the people on this forum more than likely.
I've met Fr. Ripperger and my sister and brother in law were very close friends with him when he lived in Idaho. He's a PhD psychologist (that's the NewChurch version of a moral theologian). He seems solid on the surface but it's undeniable that his thinking has to be a bit schizophrenic to justify his remaining in NewChurch.
I lump him into the same category as Sensus Fidelium, Ryan Grant, US Grace Force, Fr. Altman, Mother Miriam, etc. Trust but verify...
Many of his conferences are very good however...
-
All the more reason to keep to the centuries-old tried and true basics, Lorenzo Scupoli's The Spiritual Combat, a book that St. Francis de Sales actually carried in his pocket while salvaging the souls of Geneva that had fallen into Calvinist heresy.
Scupoli doesn't tell tales of exorcisms, doesn't venture into Thomistic inventories, and all but ignores heterodoxy. Instead he admonishes us to pray, seek the Eucharist, and set ourselves straight in stark humility and complete trust in the Lord, without which demons will laugh at us. Scupoli hardly even mentions spiritual warfare until around midway through. So his book in effect discourages prurient curiosity about the dark side that unfortunately does attract some part of Fr. Ripperger's current audience.
-
All the more reason to keep to the centuries-old tried and true basics, Lorenzo Scupoli's The Spiritual Combat, a book that St. Francis de Sales actually carried in his pocket while salvaging the souls of Geneva that had fallen into Calvinist heresy.
Scupoli doesn't tell tales of exorcisms, doesn't venture into Thomistic inventories, and all but ignores heterodoxy. Instead he admonishes us to pray, seek the Eucharist, and set ourselves straight in stark humility and complete trust in the Lord, without which demons will laugh at us. Scupoli hardly even mentions spiritual warfare until around midway through. So his book in effect discourages prurient curiosity about the dark side that unfortunately does attract some part of Fr. Ripperger's current audience.
That's an excellent book. Time to re-read.
I'm very troubled by "Catholics" who are defending the "Asbury" incident. BTW, Asbury is Kentucky Pentacostal territory.
-
Also, when he says: "The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is..." when what he means is "The intrinsic value of any valid consecration" only serves to confuse the issue and imo, does only harm.
It's the double-speak of Vatican II. The V2 periti were deft at plausible deniability, and with the above, NOM apologists continue to silence unaware laity. In that at least, a lot of what Fr. Ripperger says probably shouldn't be out there so readily available as it is.
-
No. Having authority over one's family does not translate into having authority over the demons who might be afflicting them. There are no "deliverance prayers" in any 1962 Missal. There are imprecatory prayers to Our Lady and St. Michael, but there is zero precedent for prayers where the laity issue commands to demons.
The Angelus Press Daily Missal on pages 1795-1796 contains two versions of the St. Michael Prayer that are significantly longer and more detailed than the recognizable daily version. The header on page 1796 is in boldface, all caps: "PRAYER AGAINST SATAN AND THE REBELLIOUS ANGELS." Also, pages 1796-1798 contain the text of an Exorcism (in English). At the top of page 1796, it states (emphasis added),
The Holy Father exhorts priests to say this prayer as often as possible, as a simple exorcism to curb the power of the devil and prevent him from doing harm. The faithful may also say it in their own name, for the same purpose, as any approved prayer. Its use is recommended when action of the devil is suspected, causing malice in men, violent temptations, and even storms and various calamities. It could be used a solemn exorcism (an official and public ceremony, in Latin) to expel the devil. It would then be said by a priest, in the name of the Church, and only with the Bishop's permission.
Therefore, is it that the 1967 Imprimatur at the bottom of page 1798 is too recent to be trustworthy, or is it that the above quoted instruction is not explicit enough for the average untrained layperson to grasp what may or may not be said "in their own name, for the same purpose"? Is it a copyediting error of a missing section header, and/or "prayer" in the singular vs. "prayers" in the plural? This is a hand missal in wide distribution. It's not a contraband copy of the version of Dominion that Fr. Ripperger wrote for and sells to priests only.
Not to derail this thread into a discussion of what is or isn't a deliverance prayer. Yet it's one more example of the current times during which we're more or less fending for ourselves based on the context-less content of YouTube videos and the back pages of hand missals.