Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?  (Read 6073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2023, 07:59:51 PM »
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?

Re: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?
« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2023, 09:03:12 PM »
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.


Re: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2023, 09:45:00 PM »
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.

Re: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?
« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2023, 11:13:21 PM »
I think I'll just stick to the St Michael prayer, thank you.  I say it sometimes several times a day.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: What did Fr. Ripperger actually say?
« Reply #14 on: March 02, 2023, 04:35:20 AM »
What cut it for me was his booklet The Merit of the Mass 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?