Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Mr G on March 26, 2019, 12:41:42 PM
-
https://akacatholic.com/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/
(https://akacatholic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Fr-Ripperger.jpg)A recent sermon given by Fr. Chad Ripperger (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hvS5C6XOSc) on the problems effecting the so-called “traditional movement” has been receiving a fair bit of attention in certain circles, and not without reason.
“I just want people to be aware that these are the kinds of problems that we’re up against,” Fr. Ripperger said. Why? Because, according to him, these issues are present “pretty much across the board in almost every traditionalist apostolate” and they are the reason “why the tradition isn’t being recouped as quickly” as it might otherwise.
Fr. Ripperger makes some good points; e.g., concerning the necessity of avoiding pride and remaining ever aware that it is only by God’s grace that any of us have either been born into, or drawn into, tradition.
At a certain point, however, Fr. Ripperger veers onto some shaky ground, saying:
We have to stop detracting against the Magisterium. Okay, why? Because in the end it destroys people’s ability to the virtue of piety. How you can expect people to want to submit themselves to Christ’s legitimate authority, handed on through the Magisterium, if you’re constantly running down the bishops and the priests and the Pope and things of that sort.
Certainly, there is a very important distinction to be made between attacking a person in an act of subjective judgment – be that man a member of the hierarchy or otherwise – and attacking his errors, false teachings and heresies in an objective sense. The former is sinful; the latter, necessary.
That said, it seems to me that the unwillingness to make this distinction is found every bit as often or more among those who reject tradition as compared to those attempting to defend it. In other words, those determined to remain entrenched in the comforts of conservatism often disingenuously accuse those who stand up for tradition of attacking persons; when in truth, false teachings and impious behaviors are truly being attacked.
Furthermore, let’s be clear, the duty of submitting to legitimate ecclesial authority presupposes that doing so is tantamount to submission to the authentic Magisterium of the Church. Submitting to the kind of garbage that is being freely cast about by so many of today’s priests and bishops (most especially the one presently dressed in papal whites) is a grave danger to souls. If a defender of tradition should inspire a lack of blind trust in modernist Rome and its leaders, praise God.
I think it is fair to say that pretty much all so-called “traditionalist apostolates” worthy of the name – meaning, those with a voice in Catholic media – are very clear about the necessity of submitting to the Church’s perennial Magisterium; as opposed to the contrary novelties that are so often put forth by the hierarchy of today.
Fr. Ripperger continued:
You should never say anything against somebody unless it’s necessary – that is, by necessary, it’s necessary for that person’s spiritual life, or their physical well-being or what have you; it’s just, don’t exaggerate it and it’s charitable. What does that mean? It means that it’s proceeds from a desire for people’s spiritual being and for the love of God not because you’re mad and angry and want to hack at people.
With respect to necessity, Fr. Ripperger left out something very important. More often than not, when the errors and offenses of a priest or bishop – including the one presently running the show in Rome – are being criticized, it is being done for the good of those who may be misled; i.e., for the glory of God and the salvation of souls. That said, he does make a good point; we should frequently examine our motives just to be certain that we are acting for the right reasons.
Fr. Ripperger then served up a some ice cold Full Communion Kool Aid, saying:
This negative attitude towards the Magisterium is one of the reasons why the Magisterium has been so slow to give us anything because people have had such a negative attitude, they’re just like, well, we have to be careful with what we’re giving these people because you know they’re gonna end up biting the hand that feeds them.
I’m not buying this for a second. There is only one reason why the so-called “Magisterium” of today (i.e., the hierarchy of today) does not “give us anything” authentically Catholic and genuinely nourishing for the soul, and that is because they are largely hirelings of the conciliar church-of-man who have not the true faith. Period.
To hear Fr. Ripperger speak one would imagine that some substantial number of the bishops of today actually have a genuine desire to lead the flock in the way of tradition, but it is the attitude of the faithful that is preventing it. The idea is absurd.
Fr. Ripperger goes on:
Then they … allow the filial devotion to the office of the papacy to wane; that is, not making proper distinctions between the man and the office. It doesn’t matter what the man does. The fact of the matter is we must be faithful and loyal to the office.
Again, I’m not buying it. As anyone with authentic filial devotion to the papacy surely knows, it most certainly does matter what the man does – in the present case, Jorge Bergoglio; a man who has no respect for the papacy whatsoever. What he does, and has been doing since 13 March 2013, has arguably done more harm to the image of the Office of Peter, and therefore loyalty to said Office, than any other person of the last several centuries; with the only possible exception being his “bright light,” Paul VI.
So, in conclusion, is Fr. Ripperger a determined defender of tradition, or a company man who is willing, on occasion, to carry the water for corporate?
The answer seems to be a little of both. While Fr. Ripperger’s sermons often have much of substance to offer in the way of tradition, his words, like those of everyone else, must be carefully scrutinized for the presence of “a little leaven.” With respect to the present sermon, we find some of each.
This is perhaps not surprising given that he is a priest of the Fraternity of St. Peter, a “full communion” society of which at least one newly ordained priest (http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/former-pro-baseball-player-completes-transition-to-priesthood) (who also happens to serve my parish) is pleased to credit “Saint” John Paul II with his vocation.
In reality, the reason “why the tradition isn’t being recouped as quickly” as it might otherwise isn’t because so-called traditionalist laity are acting up – although, granted, this isn’t helping on the individual level. It is because… wait for it… the Council, the bastard rite of Paul VI, and a decade’s long series of men-in-white who are Hell bent and determined to promote them.
So, while we must labor to defend the true Faith and lead others to it as best we can, the tradition isn’t going to be recouped in any broad sense until such time as we are given a faithful pope who will abrogate both the Council and the Novus Ordo Missae. All indications are that the stage will not be set for this to occur apart from a very painful act of chastisement; one that will force the surviving portion of humanity back to its collective knees.
In the meantime, the Church certainly could stand to benefit from churchmen who are willing to forgo the role of company man entirely in favor of plainly condemning the Council, the Novus Ordo, and poisonous ideas of every kind; holding accountable, by name, the priests, the bishops, and the popes who have been peddling them.
-
Fr Ripperger is great on many points of doctrine, theology and devotion, but he's still infected with Modernism to some degree (as we all are). Yet he's more infected since he won't condemn the novus ordo or V2. He's spiritually bi-polar, as are all indult priests. Keep him in your prayers; he is the type of priest that, if converted to Tradition, would be a force.
-
I never considered him to be an actual Traditional Catholic. This just reinforces my original sense about him.
-
The fact of the matter is we must be faithful and loyal to the office.
In years past that meant obedience to the discipline and teachings on faith and morals of the occupant of the office, Father.
A real conundrum in this day and age.
Probably underlying his many words he is saying under his breath: but don't you dare follow Amoris Laetitia or believe the Church doesn't recognize the death penalty. It is the old game of recognize and resist (R & R). Same old, same old. Which when all is said and done: practical sedeplenism.
Sorry, Father this game can only be played so long until people wise up. FSSP is riddled with his type of thinking. Then they have the gall of having Francis's picture in the church.
To hear Fr. Ripperger speak one would imagine that some substantial number of the bishops of today actually have a genuine desire to lead the flock in the way of tradition, but it is the attitude of the faithful that is preventing it. The idea is absurd.
ROFLOL Talking about drinking the cool aid. More than likely spiced with cocaine.
-
Fr Ripperger is great on many points of doctrine, theology and devotion, but he's still infected with Modernism to some degree (as we all are). Yet he's more infected since he won't condemn the novus ordo or V2. He's spiritually bi-polar, as are all indult priests. Keep him in your prayers; he is the type of priest that, if converted to Tradition, would be a force.
Remember that we are in the midst of what Our Lady called "diabolical disorientation." In one of his talks on exorcism, Father Ripperger said the demon challenged what authority the exorcist (Father Ripperger) was under. Father replied that he is under the local Bishop (of course, Novus Ordo).
It's clear that exorcists must be under the AUTHORITY of the local bishop and part of the hierarchial Church founded by Jesus Christ. Only simple "thinkers" who fail to understand the importance of spiritual authority would criticize this good priest who is doing the best he can to fight for the Church, to fight against the enemy, to assist those who are possessed.
-
Father Vincent Lampert has been an exorcist for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis since 2005 and is the pastor at St. Malachy’s in Indianapolis. He trained at the North American College in Rome and assisted with more than 40 exorcisms with longtime Italian exorcist Father Carmine De Filippi. Although the identities of most exorcists are hidden, Father Lampert often gives talks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBOkqr9r1qQ) . . . he said that he sees an increasing number of people involved in Satanic rituals and opening themselves up to evil.
“The reason a major exorcism needs a bishop’s permission is that the priest talks directly to the devil and commands him in the name of Jesus Christ to leave that person,” he said. “For the priest to be able to do that, he needs the authority of the Church behind him.”
“Demons recognize the authority of bishops and the Church. If you claim authority on your own, it can get you into trouble,” he warned the laity. He referred to the example in Acts 19, when some Jєωιѕн exorcists tried to expel an evil spirit. The devil said: “Jesus I recognize, Paul I know, but who are you?” Then he attacked them.
"It’s not the exorcists that have the power,” Father Lampert said, “but the power and authority of the Church that comes from Jesus Christ. Catholics understand that individuals don’t have that power.”
-
Remember that we are in the midst of what Our Lady called "diabolical disorientation." In one of his talks on exorcism, Father Ripperger said the demon challenged what authority the exorcist (Father Ripperger) was under. Father replied that he is under the local Bishop (of course, Novus Ordo).
It's clear that exorcists must be under the AUTHORITY of the local bishop and part of the hierarchial Church founded by Jesus Christ. Only simple "thinkers" who fail to understand the importance of spiritual authority would criticize this good priest who is doing the best he can to fight for the Church, to fight against the enemy, to assist those who are possessed.
The Church having authority to provide exorcisms still doesn't mean the novus ordo/indult is a good thing.
-
https://akacatholic.com/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/
Louie has provided these updates to his original story:
UPDATE: A kind reader has pointed out that the sermon in question, although receiving renewed attention today and just recently uploaded to Youtube (linked above), was initially published back in August of 2009 when Pope Benedict XVI was still pope.
UPDATE: This same kind reader has also pointed out:
Fr. Ripperger is no longer with the FSSP and hasn’t been for a few years. He has started his own Society of exorcists under the title of Our Lady of Sorrows (www.dolorans.org (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dolorans.org%2F%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR2SWhl9QOdazn17hejYlL1NFWxERgtBaCM_O0CZo2kbUGawkBPVy5TT0y4&h=AT3lOQ8ODuS5JCrRQASdzUtDjqdj-7cnl1IyyC22zDF-jScDkTAbT6bywNxBI89HD43f1nBU-E3yhSx_oDxoGhqGNKBDfTl94nQVDSIYzp6XQgGsKk55dS3gnHrvmvteRnWtJhti69vnsDsHrgdgPzfFeXk).) at the request of the former bishop of Tulsa, OK (who’s liberal successor subsequently banished his order as well as an order of nuns who evangelized the Jєωs). The bishop of Denver invited his order to Denver where is currently operates.
-
It's clear that exorcists must be under the AUTHORITY of the local bishop and part of the hierarchial Church founded by Jesus Christ. Only simple "thinkers" who fail to understand the importance of spiritual authority would criticize this good priest who is doing the best he can to fight for the Church, to fight against the enemy, to assist those who are possessed.
I don't think that is so. A few years ago, Fr. John Brucciani (SSPX) said he has performed exorcisms in the past, he's always only ever been SSPX.
-
The Church having authority to provide exorcisms still doesn't mean the novus ordo/indult is a good thing.
Correct. There's no doubt that God supplies the necessary authority to Traditional priests given the decay of the Novus Ordo "hierarchy" ... due to the state of emergency.
-
I'm sure that Canon Law supplies jurisdiction to provide exorcisms as well, per the state of emergency, assuming the priest is properly trained.
-
The Church having authority to provide exorcisms still doesn't mean the novus ordo/indult is a good thing.
Agreed. Father Ripperger is in a situation none of us are in; none of us are being challenged by demons regarding our authority to cast them out.
-
I thank Father Ripperger for his teaching.
-
Father Vincent Lampert has been an exorcist for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis since 2005 and is the pastor at St. Malachy’s in Indianapolis. He trained at the North American College in Rome and assisted with more than 40 exorcisms with longtime Italian exorcist Father Carmine De Filippi. Although the identities of most exorcists are hidden, Father Lampert often gives talks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBOkqr9r1qQ) . . . he said that he sees an increasing number of people involved in Satanic rituals and opening themselves up to evil.
“The reason a major exorcism needs a bishop’s permission is that the priest talks directly to the devil and commands him in the name of Jesus Christ to leave that person,” he said. “For the priest to be able to do that, he needs the authority of the Church behind him.”
“Demons recognize the authority of bishops and the Church. If you claim authority on your own, it can get you into trouble,” he warned the laity. He referred to the example in Acts 19, when some Jєωιѕн exorcists tried to expel an evil spirit. The devil said: “Jesus I recognize, Paul I know, but who are you?” Then he attacked them.
"It’s not the exorcists that have the power,” Father Lampert said, “but the power and authority of the Church that comes from Jesus Christ. Catholics understand that individuals don’t have that power.”
Whom do Sedes use if they need an exorcist?
-
Fr. Ripperger has many good materials. However, I don't agree with this lecture.
-
https://akacatholic.com/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/
Louie has provided these updates to his original story:
UPDATE: A kind reader has pointed out that the sermon in question, although receiving renewed attention today and just recently uploaded to Youtube (linked above), was initially published back in August of 2009 when Pope Benedict XVI was still pope.
UPDATE: This same kind reader has also pointed out:
Fr. Ripperger is no longer with the FSSP and hasn’t been for a few years. He has started his own Society of exorcists under the title of Our Lady of Sorrows (www.dolorans.org (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dolorans.org%2F%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR2SWhl9QOdazn17hejYlL1NFWxERgtBaCM_O0CZo2kbUGawkBPVy5TT0y4&h=AT3lOQ8ODuS5JCrRQASdzUtDjqdj-7cnl1IyyC22zDF-jScDkTAbT6bywNxBI89HD43f1nBU-E3yhSx_oDxoGhqGNKBDfTl94nQVDSIYzp6XQgGsKk55dS3gnHrvmvteRnWtJhti69vnsDsHrgdgPzfFeXk).) at the request of the former bishop of Tulsa, OK (who’s liberal successor subsequently banished his order as well as an order of nuns who evangelized the Jєωs). The bishop of Denver invited his order to Denver where is currently operates.
Correct.
But just try to get to fr. Ripperger. I tried, and was told by the dorans website to go through my local NO parish for evaluation and try to transfer to fr. Ripperger.
Huge let down. Very sad.
-
Fr. Ripperger is an excellent Priest and an authorized Exorcist who knows by experience the demonic realities he preaches against. Good independent Priests who desire their exorcisms to be more efficacious should consider seeking faculties from Rome or the local Bishop. It is always preferable to exercise habitual jurisdiction. I bought Father's excellent book many years ago, called Deliverance Prayers, very well worth buying and praying. Fr. Ripperger also exhorts both those whom he has exorcized, as well as all Catholics generally, to practice devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows, very useful and powerful against the enemy: https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/devotion-to-our-lady-of-sorrows-by-fr-ripperger/ (https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/devotion-to-our-lady-of-sorrows-by-fr-ripperger/) The Blessed Mother had promised, "5) “I will defend them in their spiritual battles with the infernal enemy and I will protect them at every instant of their lives.” and Father often makes reference to this in his books and sermons. I highly recommend Deliverance Prayers to all, it's a great book.
Sample review of that book from Amazon: "Highly recommended book for families struggling with generational spiritual problems, as Father gives a good explanation of the devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows in the introduction. She can give graces to reveal the roots to these problems, since Her Heart was pierced so that ours would be exposed. I also love the litanies and devotional prayer section which includes prayers to St. Michael, Our Lady, the Precious Blood devotion, etc. These are becoming a daily part of my prayer life, along with the Breastplate of St. Patrick prayer. I am so thankful the prayers are in English with the Latin beside them, the holy official prayer language of the Church. With this book I have had more graces to partake of the Sacrament of Confession and grow closer to the Sacred Heart of Christ."
-
Fr. Ripperger is an excellent Priest and an authorized Exorcist who knows by experience the demonic realities he preaches against. Good independent Priests who desire their exorcisms to be more efficacious should consider seeking faculties from Rome or the local Bishop. It is always preferable to exercise habitual jurisdiction. I bought Father's excellent book many years ago, called Deliverance Prayers, very well worth buying and praying. Fr. Ripperger also exhorts both those whom he has exorcized, as well as all Catholics generally, to practice devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows, very useful and powerful against the enemy: https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/devotion-to-our-lady-of-sorrows-by-fr-ripperger/ (https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/devotion-to-our-lady-of-sorrows-by-fr-ripperger/) The Blessed Mother had promised, "5) “I will defend them in their spiritual battles with the infernal enemy and I will protect them at every instant of their lives.” and Father often makes reference to this in his books and sermons. I highly recommend Deliverance Prayers to all, it's a great book.
Sample review of that book from Amazon: "Highly recommended book for families struggling with generational spiritual problems, as Father gives a good explanation of the devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows in the introduction. She can give graces to reveal the roots to these problems, since Her Heart was pierced so that ours would be exposed. I also love the litanies and devotional prayer section which includes prayers to St. Michael, Our Lady, the Precious Blood devotion, etc. These are becoming a daily part of my prayer life, along with the Breastplate of St. Patrick prayer. I am so thankful the prayers are in English with the Latin beside them, the holy official prayer language of the Church. With this book I have had more graces to partake of the Sacrament of Confession and grow closer to the Sacred Heart of Christ."
Here is the book: https://www.amazon.com/Deliverance-Prayers-Fr-Chad-Ripperger/dp/154105671X
-
Good independent Priests who desire their exorcisms to be more efficacious should consider seeking faculties from Rome or the local Bishop. It is always preferable to exercise habitual jurisdiction.
:facepalm: ... God and the Church supply jurisdiction in this crisis due to the breakdown of the Conciliar "hierarchy".
So, XavierSem, did you consider SSPX confessions and marriages invalid before Francis explicitly granted jurisdiction for them?
You also ran away from the other thread, where you cited an exorcism that "Econe was on the right path", claiming that the statements were undeniably true, but then ignored the parts of the same exorcism where the demon declared that John Paul II was not the pope.
-
:facepalm: ... God and the Church supply jurisdiction in this crisis due to the breakdown of the Conciliar "hierarchy".
So, XavierSem, did you consider SSPX confessions and marriages invalid before Francis explicitly granted jurisdiction for them?
You also ran away from the other thread, where you cited an exorcism that "Econe was on the right path", claiming that the statements were undeniably true, but then ignored the parts of the same exorcism where the demon declared that John Paul II was not the pope.
So let me get this straight: you are further solidifying the sedevacantist position by the acclamation of a demon?
-
So let me get this straight: you are further solidifying the sedevacantist position by the acclamation of a demon?
It is known that the damned and demons have been compelled by God to speak the truth in order for souls on earth to learn from fatal errors of the damned. The truth being spoken is not an act of charity by the damned and demons, rather they're being compelled by God to speak it.
-
https://youtu.be/TMcvZaiBwe4 (https://youtu.be/TMcvZaiBwe4)
Spiritual Warfare
-
Here is an excellent idea for families with demons flying around them.
Stop breaking the 6th and 9th commandments.
There fixed your problems. And on top of it you don't need to visit exorcists with questionable ideas about the condition of the Church.
-
:facepalm: ... God and the Church supply jurisdiction in this crisis due to the breakdown of the Conciliar "hierarchy".
So, XavierSem, did you consider SSPX confessions and marriages invalid before Francis explicitly granted jurisdiction for them?
You also ran away from the other thread, where you cited an exorcism that "Econe was on the right path", claiming that the statements were undeniably true, but then ignored the parts of the same exorcism where the demon declared that John Paul II was not the pope.
Where? I know of no such quote that JPII was not the pope.
The exorcisms were done in the mid 70's. JPII became pope in 1978. Doesn't jive.
Urban legend?
-
It is known that the damned and demons have been compelled by God to speak the truth in order for souls on earth to learn from fatal errors of the damned. The truth being spoken is not an act of charity by the damned and demons, rather they're being compelled by God to speak it.
words of a real exorcist
it is worth remembering the words of a great exorcist, Father Gabriele Amorth, concerning "revelations" during rituals: "The devil's answers must be examined”. Sometimes the Lord imposes on the devil to tell the truth to prove that Satan has been defeated by Christ and is obliged to obey the followers of Christ who are acting in his name. Often the devil expressly states that he is forced to speak, and does whatever he can to avoid doing so. Woe, however, to the exorcist if he loses himself behind curious questions (which the ritual expressly forbids) or if he lets himself be led into a discussion with the devil! As he is a master of lies."
https://www.lastampa.it/vatican-insider/en/2017/06/15/news/the-secret-doctrine-of-the-heralds-correa-encourages-the-death-of-the-pope-1.34582959
-
A couple of things:
First, yes, as someone said here, and this would apply to all priests: It's important to look at the dates of some sermons. Trad priests sometimes become more decidedly firm with regard to the conciliar church versus Tradition, and a sermon a priest gave 10 years ago will reflect a very different perspective from a more recent distaste for compromise he has reached after a time period.
Second, Fr. R has been with the OLOS apostolate for some time now. He's no longer with the FSSP.
Third, no single priest -- even when he belongs to a particular trad apostolate -- can be assumed to embody the majority of viewpoints in that group, let alone the entirety of viewpoints. I have been listening for many weeks now to a priest who is still with the FSSP. He is markedly different from Fr. R, although I have a lot of respect for Fr. R. This other priest concentrates more, much more, on trad spirituality, even though he has given many talks on doctrine as well. By contrast, Fr. R is much more head-trippy (and I don't mean about exorcism -- there he is quite concrete and not intellectual). But overall, Fr R concentrates on theology and modern society. This other priest emphasizes traditional spirituality but is very much on fire with his conviction that God will purge the Church spiritually and that among her current leaders number a whole huge bunch of "heretics, apostates, and sodomites."
He also has a different viewpoint on The Final (General) Judgment than Fr. R. has. Fr. R insists that all of our sins will be exposed to the entire globe, and that "we will have to answer for every infraction" to every person and to the entire Heavenly Court (including for previously disclosed, forgiven sins). The other priest says that, among the Elect who remain at the Judgment, their sins will not be disclosed but will be sheltered from the knowledge of others, whereas the sins of the damned will be made public. In light of my own traditional education, the second priest's statement conforms more to Catholic dogma and spirituality.
With regard to Fr. R's viewpoint on "all trads," "most trads," "trads as a group," etc., he is hands-down wrong. It's the one area in which I disagree with him the most. I've heard this same claim from some lay people as well: "You know, I've been around." Well, sir or ma'am, if you haven't become deeply acquainted with every trad parish and every trad apostolate in --let's just say the United States, then you are in no position to make such statements as "trads have a real problem with anger. " SOME, even many, trads have a real problem with anger, but particularly if they make no attempt to convert their anger to individual spiritual zeal for their own conversion. I could go on, but I think you can get the picture with just this one snippet. He generalizes a whole bunch about the spiritual state of the trad soul, shall we say, but he rarely even comes to my State and I'm almost positive he has never visited our parish. We are very much NOT a bunch of angry people.
Fr. R sees extremes, and from those extremes generalizes unjustly and inaccurately. It is also the nature of his ministry that he literally pops in and out of locations. He does not have a parish that I'm aware of, but I'm open to correction from anyone here. He does MISSIONS. That means, pop in and pop out. He has a schedule, which is viewable on that OLOS website. My own trad priest is quite familiar with Fr. R's sermons, I think, because I've discussed them in spiritual direction with my priest. But my own priest is much, much more focused on spirituality than Fr. R is, who --again-- has three foci: exorcism (first), doctrine, and the state of modern society. He does speak about spirituality but not to the degree that some trad priests do (who also have sermons online), and definitely not in the style of other priests.
-
Mmagdala,
Thank youf for your good and interesting post. May I ask who the priest from the FSSP is to whom you refer? And where can I listen to his talks or sermons?
-
Second, Fr. R has been with the OLOS apostolate for some time now. He's no longer with the FSSP.
Oh really!? i didn't now that. He's now with Our Lady of something or other, you say. I get lost sometimes in a sea of CI acronyms. Can't keep them straight. Would you describe Fr. R. as just another, in a growing number of rogue traditional priests? When I read someone like xavier sem declaring that Fr. R. is an excellent priest, my immediate response is "Uh-oh!"
-
https://youtu.be/TMcvZaiBwe4 (https://youtu.be/TMcvZaiBwe4)
Spiritual Warfare
Although he has given LOTS of conferences on Spiritual Warfare, this one is my favorite because it combines several of them more neatly and because it contains some remarks not in the series of spiritual warfare sermons. Also, there's something about seeing him at the pulpit that is more engaging. Some sermons are actually part of taped missions, so those you also see the movement, but most of his recorded sermons on YouTube just show static images and no live footage of him.
I do respect him, but particularly as an exorcist, and I have learned an awful lot about the power of the devil in my life merely from listening to his accounts about how pervasive and everyday the influence of demons can be. However, overall, he is not my favorite priest-speaker. I prefer the ones with a deep and sensitive spirituality. Fr R is more comfortable talking about doctrine (esp. Thomas) and about spiritual warfare, including cosmic spiritual warfare. Also, as has been noted here or on another thread, he has a distorted perspective on trads, limited to his own travels and his brief stays in those locations.
-
Mmagdala,
Thank youf for your good and interesting post. May I ask who the priest from the FSSP is to whom you refer? And where can I listen to his talks or sermons?
Yes. Here they are.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnb8xV4MiSnONIcsOEfHkPZm-oTkfWKnF (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnb8xV4MiSnONIcsOEfHkPZm-oTkfWKnF)
I have listened to very many of his sermons. In some of them, he can barely make it through without losing his composure. You'll hear him pause for a long time at certain parts of a few sermons; he's regaining his composure at those points, having become pretty emotional.
You know how YouTube is: you won't necessarily see everything in the category on the first page. For example, he has given 16 talks in a series about End Times, called Our Lady of Revelation. He gets really angry about the prelates in the Church. Either in that series or a separate talk, he calls Cardinal Mueller "a shameful liar" or something like that.
He does a beautiful job on Spiritual Wounds, but for that matter, Fr. Ripperger also does a good job on spiritual wounds, and I think both of them have more than one conference on the subject. It's just that Fr. Wolfe is more moving, at least to me. One of Fr. Wolfe's prayers, which he made up spontaneously during a talk on woundedness (I think the talk is called "The Purpose of Suffering"), I copied down and have obediently prayed it, as he suggested, right before HC.
I think that maybe SV'ists will not be 100% behind him because I think he disapproves of the SV thesis and movement, but then so does Fr. R.
Also, know that when he means sodomy, he expresses it in one of two ways: "Perversion" or "The San Francisco lifestyle."
-
Oh really!? i didn't now that. He's now with Our Lady of something or other, you say. I get lost sometimes in a sea of CI acronyms. Can't keep them straight. Would you describe Fr. R. as just another, in a growing number of rogue traditional priests? When I read someone like xavier sem declaring that Fr. R. is an excellent priest, my immediate response is "Uh-oh!"
OLOS = Our Lady of Sorrows. Fr. R also has a talk on this on YouTube. I think several talks, actually.
Interesting thought about rogue priests. It might be unfair to call him "rogue." And he is not "independent" in the sense that we trads mean that (outside of a diocesan structure and not affiliated with an apostolate recognized by Rome). Temperamentally, I think "independence" is probably a state that suits Fr. R well, in that, while he is connected with Auxilium Angelorum as well as OLOS, as an exorcist he's called upon in many locations and typically travels for those requests. For that matter, I'm acquainted with a local exorcist in the N.O., whom I have seen a couple of times myself, and he also travels all over the place -- for conferences, to train others, and to perform exorcisms.
However, Fr R does believe in the traditional lines of authority, so I would take it to the bank that has permission from the bishop of wherever area he works in most of the time, to operate as an exorcist. And since various parishes solicit him for missions, that would mean he would have to be recognized by the bishop operating in that region.
Fr. R is well known among trad apostolates, including non-FSSP'ers. I know that my trad priest knows who he is, even if he has not ever met him before.
-
Remember that we are in the midst of what Our Lady called "diabolical disorientation." In one of his talks on exorcism, Father Ripperger said the demon challenged what authority the exorcist (Father Ripperger) was under. Father replied that he is under the local Bishop (of course, Novus Ordo).
It's clear that exorcists must be under the AUTHORITY of the local bishop and part of the hierarchial Church founded by Jesus Christ. Only simple "thinkers" who fail to understand the importance of spiritual authority would criticize this good priest who is doing the best he can to fight for the Church, to fight against the enemy, to assist those who are possessed.
It appears that the demon recognizes the authority of the local bishop.
-
I tried to contact Fr Ripperger for spiritual help and evaluation for a relative that lives in Denver ( I do not live there). My relation is seriously depressed and was abused as a child which can be an entryway for the demonic, although I have no way of knowing any of that pertaining to this person. I thought it was Providential that Father wound up in the same city as my relative. I called and got a fellow who apparently does clearance and intake , which I completely understand, as there must be hundreds of people, serious or not , trying to reach Father Ripperger for help. The man on the phone had me do as series of prayers for a month or more ( this was a few years ago so I don't remember exactly. This man was NOT a priest.) I hope I'm not sounding too flip, but this "front man" kind of gave me the creeps, he certainly was into the drama of the whole exorcist thing. He had a "Max Von Sidow" ominous type of presentation, as if he were more than just someone fielding cases for Father. Eventually we had a bit of a verbal altercation over the phone, after I did all of the things he instructed. My impression was that this guy thought he had "great spiritual insight' into me and my relative, but he didn't like my attitude? I was very serious about the matter! Needless to say, I never got to talk to Father Ripperger. he may not even know anything about this.
Another funny sidenote was that I had a priest that I know who was formerly associated with Fr Ripperger text me out of the blue after this bad scene with "Max". He never asked me anything directly, just seemed to be feeling me out. I never heard from him again. The whole episode left me feeling very violated and marginalized.
My conclusion? I don't blame Fr Ripperger directly although he should have an idea what his associates are actually saying to people seeking his help, so he bears some responsibility.
In conclusion, that was really my very LAST time dealing with anything or anyone related to the Consilliar church. I have been burned so many times before, and this certainly was the icing on the cake. Unfortunately my relative is still in a very dark place and I pray for his life ( and soul) daily.
-
Josefa,
I'm very sorry for your experience and the unfortunate, demeaning position you were put it by a layperson who perhaps was assuming authority he had no right to assume. I can't speak to the purpose or authenticity of that person "speaking for Fr. R." I will only share this:
In his defense, he does need to screen requests (and he has indirectly alluded to this in his talks) because a layperson can innocently assume a demonic influence over someone or over himself, but be quite mistaken. (Probably that's the reason for directing particular prayers as a first step.)
-
As I said above, I understand completely the need for "triage" of inquiries. The person doing it, however was not appropriate and seemed to be taking on a lot of unwarranted responsibility and was also taking himself a bit too seriously as an adjunct to a "potential exorcism". This guy was NOT a priest nor was his personal evaluation of the situation even close. I felt like I was in a bad movie.
Fr Ripperger needs to train better staff.
-
What's with all this Fr. Ripperger stuff??
He is an indult priest, no??
Why does anyone here take an indult priest seriously??
-
What's with all this Fr. Ripperger stuff??
He is an indult priest, no??
Why does anyone here take an indult priest seriously??
He was formerly FSSP and then founded a new fraternal order of exorcists who live a semi-cloistered contemplative life.
Just because a priest may disagree with you on the facets of supplied jurisdiction or the state of necessity, or whether or not one should obey a local ordinary doesn't make him a bad priest. He is bringing many souls to the traditional faith through his conferences.
So instead of tearing down priests who are actually preaching the faith and offering the traditional sacraments according to their conscience let's pray for the renewal of the Church and the conversion of the bad clergy (and he is not one of them IMO).
-
He was formerly FSSP and then founded a new fraternal order of exorcists who live a semi-cloistered contemplative life.
Just because a priest may disagree with you on the facets of supplied jurisdiction or the state of necessity, or whether or not one should obey a local ordinary doesn't make him a bad priest. He is bringing many souls to the traditional faith through his conferences.
So instead of tearing down priests who are actually preaching the faith and offering the traditional sacraments according to their conscience let's pray for the renewal of the Church and the conversion of the bad clergy (and he is not one of them IMO).
Two things:
1) It’s not even clear to me that he is a priest at all.
2) The Church does not need renewal. It needs restoration.
-
Two things:
1) It’s not even clear to me that he is a priest at all.
2) The Church does not need renewal. It needs restoration.
Just curious, are you Sede?
-
Clarification:
When I was seeking Fr Ripperger's assistance a few years back, I was not totally invested in the resistance. I am now. We only go to Holy Mass with resistance or valid independent priests. I only piped in about Fr Ripperger because of my past experience, thinking it might be of note.
-
Just curious, are you Sede?
Yes, I am quite well-known to be sede.
Ultra-dogmatic.
The Dimond Brothers are flaming liberals compared to me.
Long live Pope Michael!
Were you born yesterday?
-
Yes, I am quite well-known to be sede.
Ultra-dogmatic.
The Dimond Brothers are flaming liberals compared to me.
Long live Pope Michael!
Were you born yesterday?
It's incredibly prideful to assume a new user must have heard of the legendary SeanJohnson and is an ignorant fool if he doesn't know all that famed man's wise opinions.
-
I tried to contact Fr Ripperger for spiritual help and evaluation for a relative that lives in Denver ( I do not live there). My relation is seriously depressed and was abused as a child which can be an entryway for the demonic, although I have no way of knowing any of that pertaining to this person. I thought it was Providential that Father wound up in the same city as my relative. I called and got a fellow who apparently does clearance and intake , which I completely understand, as there must be hundreds of people, serious or not , trying to reach Father Ripperger for help. The man on the phone had me do as series of prayers for a month or more ( this was a few years ago so I don't remember exactly. This man was NOT a priest.) I hope I'm not sounding too flip, but this "front man" kind of gave me the creeps, he certainly was into the drama of the whole exorcist thing. He had a "Max Von Sidow" ominous type of presentation, as if he were more than just someone fielding cases for Father. Eventually we had a bit of a verbal altercation over the phone, after I did all of the things he instructed. My impression was that this guy thought he had "great spiritual insight' into me and my relative, but he didn't like my attitude? I was very serious about the matter! Needless to say, I never got to talk to Father Ripperger. he may not even know anything about this.
Another funny sidenote was that I had a priest that I know who was formerly associated with Fr Ripperger text me out of the blue after this bad scene with "Max". He never asked me anything directly, just seemed to be feeling me out. I never heard from him again. The whole episode left me feeling very violated and marginalized.
My conclusion? I don't blame Fr Ripperger directly although he should have an idea what his associates are actually saying to people seeking his help, so he bears some responsibility.
In conclusion, that was really my very LAST time dealing with anything or anyone related to the Consilliar church. I have been burned so many times before, and this certainly was the icing on the cake. Unfortunately my relative is still in a very dark place and I pray for his life ( and soul) daily.
I don't care for him. He seemed off to me somehow.
Someone sent me a CD of his talks a few years ago and, aside from the fact that he talks so fast and is often hard to decipher, said some things that I found strange. I don't recall exactly what it was he said, but I do remember wondering what all the fuss was about him.
-
I don't care for him. He seemed off to me somehow.
Someone sent me a CD of his talks a few years ago and, aside from the fact that he talks so fast and is often hard to decipher, said some things that I found strange. I don't recall exactly what it was he said, but I do remember wondering what all the fuss was about him.
I listened to his sermons posted on Youtube and at first thought highly of him and I did learn a few things, but before too long I stopped listening for the exact same reasons you posted.
-
As I said above, I understand completely the need for "triage" of inquiries. The person doing it, however was not appropriate and seemed to be taking on a lot of unwarranted responsibility and was also taking himself a bit too seriously as an adjunct to a "potential exorcism". This guy was NOT a priest nor was his personal evaluation of the situation even close. I felt like I was in a bad movie.
Fr Ripperger needs to train better staff.
I didn't deny that, Josefa. I wasn't arguing with you about the competency of his staff. I even made reference to perhaps a staff member assuming authority inappropriately. I merely know that Fr. R gets far more requests that he can directly screen himself. And I also know that sometimes he does visit possible candidates for exorcism when there is no way to sufficiently prescreen them, and he does so regardless of whether those are true cases of demonic Obsession or demonic Possession, or whether there is no acute level of demonic influence that can be addressed by an exorcism -- rather that the candidate should be exorcising his sins in the Sacrament of Confession.
General comment, not to Josefa more than others: The most important take-away, i.m.o., of all of Fr. R's talks is that --and this is especially true as the approach of End Times accelerates -- the way to keep the demons far from our souls is to stay out of mortal sin. Commit a mortal sin, and invite the demons in.
-
I listened to his sermons posted on Youtube and at first thought highly of him and I did learn a few things, but before too long I stopped listening for the exact same reasons you posted.
When listening to sermons from traditionalist priests, it's important to understand -- and I'm not being sarcastic -- that all priests are imperfect. That is, they have their preferences and prejudices, just like laypeople. They will emphasize certain Catholic truths, de-emphasize others, depending on their knowledge base, their tasks (personal assignments), and however the Holy Ghost inspires them.
Fr. R is a bit of a rigorist, and he also loves academic analysis. He has several theological degrees. That colors his message. In addition, it's important to keep front and center the fact that he practically daily encounters Evil up close and personal. He, and his exorcist peers, have tripled their assignments in the last several years; they are all exhausted, they are so busy and so "on-call." As an exorcist, he directly experiences the hard dividing line between good and evil, between Jesus Christ and the Devil, so Fr. R admits of very little gray area, shall we say. But that is not exactly the way the Church teaches, because the Church has some humility that she knows not every tiny event that will unfold in End Times and at the General Judgment. The Church in her authority makes general statements, backed up by public Revelation, about the Last Days and about The Four Last Things, as it's called in dogma. But she hesitates to make dogmatic statements beyond that, and so priests should also hesitate.
As I mentioned earlier on this thread, Fr. Phil Wolfe's interpretation of the General Judgment differs from that of Fr. R, but due to my own education I can verify that Fr. Wolfe's is the more likely scenario and is more in accord with Catholic theology informed by Catholic spirituality.
So the "moral of the story" here, i.m.h.o., is that it is always important -- especially in these catechetically challenged times -- to inform oneself about Catholic teaching when respectfully listening to traditionalist priests. Fr. R, for reasons I just stated, combined with (I believe) some personality traits of his, tends toward rigidity and bias in some areas, including in his view of traditionalist lay people. That does not make all or any of his talks worthless or suspect; it just means that one should listen to other trad priests, as well, on the same topics. Again, I respect enormously Fr. R's work as an exorcist, and we should all be grateful for the service to God, to society, and to the Church that exorcists provide. If one only listens to those talks (Spiritual Warfare), one can benefit from greater awareness of how often we casually "invite" Satan into our souls.
-
As I mentioned earlier on this thread, Fr. Phil Wolfe's interpretation of the General Judgment differs from that of Fr. R, but due to my own education I can verify that Fr. Wolfe's is the more likely scenario and is more in accord with Catholic theology informed by Catholic spirituality.
I love listening to trad sermons and do so all the time, Fr. Wathen and Fr. Hesse are my only favs after taking Fr. R off the list, I haven't listened to anything from Fr. Wolfe as of yet but plan to once I get time to convert and download a few of his youtubes to my phone.
Fr. R just talks too fast most of the time for me and like Alexandria said, he seemed off to me somehow. Fr. R is the only one I ever heard say that the Final Judgement will take eons to get through - the way he describes it, it would take about a couple of hundred million years - which sure sounds like it would put a damper on the bliss of heaven, at least until everyone was judged.
-
Fr. R is the only one I ever heard say that the Final Judgement will take eons to get through - the way he describes it, it would take about a couple of hundred million years - which sure sounds like it would put a damper on the bliss of heaven, at least until everyone was judged.
Precisely. It lacks credibility. It also lacks conformity with Catholic spirituality. That is, on this earth, we are shown windows into the evil others commit, and those windows are salvific for us because through those lenses we see our own evil reflected back to us. That's not all we see about others, but it is part of what God allows us to see. Some priests see more than that, both figuratively and literally in Confession, as some do read souls or come quite close to viewing those areas shielded from the sight of lay people.
No way, practically speaking, would even 5 billion people in today's population -- never mind previous billions of later-risen bodies and souls at the General Judgment -- be able to provide testimony about their countless sins and "answer for each and every one of them" (according to Fr. R) to the Heavenly Court and to the entire risen population at the General Judgment. But more importantly, such a scenario is not in keeping with the economy of salvation, a key point of which is that individual salvation ceases at the General Judgment. That is the moment of sentencing, Fr. R., not a prolonged, several million-years trial. The trial has been one's own lifetime. The sentencing will be delivered at the GJ, and it will consist of only two directions, Heaven or Hell.
Further, the God of Mercy will be glorifying the Elect -- one of those only-two divisions -- by making manifest that glory, which reflects His own. That will give opportunity for the rest of the Elect to praise and glorify God Almighty, not to dwell on minute venial sins not yet confessed or on mortal sins already confessed and forgiven.
-
Precisely. It lacks credibility. It also lacks conformity with Catholic spirituality. That is, on this earth, we are shown windows into the evil others commit, and those windows are salvific for us because through those lenses we see our own evil reflected back to us. That's not all we see about others, but it is part of what God allows us to see. Some priests see more than that, both figuratively and literally in Confession, as some do read souls or come quite close to viewing those areas shielded from the sight of lay people.
No way, practically speaking, would even 5 billion people in today's population -- never mind previous billions of later-risen bodies and souls at the General Judgment -- be able to provide testimony about their countless sins and "answer for each and every one of them" (according to Fr. R) to the Heavenly Court and to the entire risen population at the General Judgment. But more importantly, such a scenario is not in keeping with the economy of salvation, a key point of which is that individual salvation ceases at the General Judgment. That is the moment of sentencing, Fr. R., not a prolonged, several million-years trial. The trial has been one's own lifetime. The sentencing will be delivered at the GJ, and it will consist of only two directions, Heaven or Hell.
Further, the God of Mercy will be glorifying the Elect -- one of those only-two divisions -- by making manifest that glory, which reflects His own. That will give opportunity for the rest of the Elect to praise and glorify God Almighty, not to dwell on minute venial sins not yet confessed or on mortal sins already confessed and forgiven.
Yes, I agree. Scratch that "couple of hundred million years" I mentioned, change that to at least a few trillion years. At any rate, thanks for the link to Fr. Wolfe, I have them on my phone now so I plan to listen to them later.
-
Can someone post the link to where Fr. Ripperger says that?
-
Can someone post the link to where Fr. Ripperger says that?
I believe these can be heard from a series of talk he gave titled, “Four Last Things”. You can find them on YouTube at Sensus Fidelium channel.
-
Can someone post the link to where Fr. Ripperger says that?
I will try to find that one tomorrow morning. Working right now. :)
-
Can someone post the link to where Fr. Ripperger says that?
He starts on the Final Judgement at about the 19 minute mark, but from 37:40 to 38:05 is where he says it. The video should start at 37:40ish when you click the link.
https://youtu.be/xH-7RYtS-VQ?t=2260
Also MM, I listened to the first 10 or so minutes of Fr. Wolfe's sermon titled: "Salvation is only in the Catholic Church." I stopped listening after he said the majority of his sermon will be about what that really means, and that he will reference writings from Msgr. Fenton, whom he praised as one of the Fathers of V2. I listened until he started talking about those who are outside of the Church while being members of the Church by desire.
So I would suggest that whoever listens to this priest to beware. He likely has some very good teachings, but they are mixed in with the bad.
-
We do know that all sins will be revealed to every man and angel at the final judgment, as it is a matter of justice.
How they are revealed, we simply don't know. I don't know where Fr. Ripperger drew his conclusion that each and every man's life and sins would be revealed in a declarative process before the heavenly court and all mankind, but there's nothing in tradition or contrary to the faith in taking this position because we simply don't know the mode by which Christ will allow these things to be revealed. It seems logical to me; however, we could also instantly know the sins of everyone else too by some special grace practically instantly because God makes it happen. Again, we simply don't know.
I don't think it's fair to find fault with Fr. Ripperger for holding this position, there is nothing immoral or against tradition about it, it is simply his opinion on what happens at the final judgment.
Even if one was part of the righteous who goes with the lamb to Heaven, it's not like you would be bothered by standing there for an extremely long time hearing about the sins of everyone; in fact, it would make you glorify God and be happy to know the profound effects of His justice and how the glory of God was drawn out of each and every one for some greater good. The only people it would bother are the damned, and they're going to be in Hell for eternity anyway, so it wouldn't matter.
Either way, it doesn't matter. What matters is living a life of holiness.
-
He likely has some very good teachings, but they are mixed in with the bad.
This applies to ANY priest who is indult or "under rome". Any priest who accepts V2 will necessarily have faulty theology and many other unorthodox views because they are infected with Modernism of the past 100 years (yes, Modernism existed prior to Pope St Pius X). They may have all the good intentions in the world, but they will still have some unorthodox views. Beware.
-
He starts on the Final Judgement at about the 19 minute mark, but from 37:40 to 38:05 is where he says it. The video should start at 37:40ish when you click the link.
https://youtu.be/xH-7RYtS-VQ?t=2260
Also MM, I listened to the first 10 or so minutes of Fr. Wolfe's sermon titled: "Salvation is only in the Catholic Church." I stopped listening after he said the majority of his sermon will be about what that really means, and that he will reference writings from Msgr. Fenton, whom he praised as one of the Fathers of V2. I listened until he started talking about those who are outside of the Church while being members of the Church by desire.
So I would suggest that whoever listens to this priest to beware. He likely has some very good teachings, but they are mixed in with the bad.
It's your choice to refuse to listen to him, but he has a ton of fabulous and powerful and orthodox sermons. One can be too impatient to sift, I suppose, but the majority of what he preaches is quite in keeping with Tradition. As I said earlier, he has 16 on End Times alone. I will find the one where he talks about the GJ and juxtapose that with Fr. R's sermon about the same, posting both. I'm just busy at the moment.
-
t seems logical to me; however, we could also instantly know the sins of everyone else too by some special grace practically instantly because God makes it happen.
We "could." However, given the rest of traditional Catholic theology, Fr. Wolfe's explanation makes more sense -- that details of the forgiven sins of the Elect will be shielded from the knowledge of the rest of the Elect because of the priority of focusing on God's glory and the power of His mercy. It's also possible, yes, that we will instantly/instantaneously be aware, somehow, of the degree of conversion of each member of the Elect and the degree of God's generosity in that forgiveness, without also being treated to a morbid and detailed display of every private confession they've ever participated in, in addition to any unconfessed sins. (The latter is Fr. R's interpretation.) It seems a tad vindictive to me, when there are probably other ways to satisfy the element of divine justice, universally revealed.
It's at the Particular Judgment where we are "treated," haha, to a display of our life, in whatever exhaustive and minute detail He so chooses. It wouldn't be necessary to repeat that, in the same manner ("accountability for every infraction" is what Fr. R was emphasizing) at the GJ.
-
It's your choice to refuse to listen to him, but he has a ton of fabulous and powerful and orthodox sermons. One can be too impatient to sift, I suppose, but the majority of what he preaches is quite in keeping with Tradition. As I said earlier, he has 16 on End Times alone. I will find the one where he talks about the GJ and juxtapose that with Fr. R's sermon about the same, posting both. I'm just busy at the moment.
I'm sure he has some things well worth hearing, but I do not understand how a priest, who is supposed to be known to be traditional, praises, references and endorses the teachings of one of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council - of all things. You'd think *that* would not even be an option for a trad priest - no?
Any way, that is why I suggested for those who listen to him to beware - especially those new to tradition.
-
details of the forgiven sins of the Elect will be shielded from the knowledge of the rest of the Elect because of the priority of focusing on God's glory and the power of His mercy.
I've not heard Fr. Wolfe say this, but I'll take your word for it. I also have not heard this before.
I am of the view that we will know each other's sins, confessed or not.
(ST; Supp. Q.87)
Article 1.
I answer that, According to Romans 2:15-16 (http://newadvent.org/bible/rom002.htm#verse15), "In the day when God (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) shall judge" each one's conscience (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm) will bear witness to him and his thoughts will accuse and defend him. And since in every judicial hearing, the witness, the accuser, and the defendant need to be acquainted with the matter (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10053b.htm) on which judgment has to be pronounced, and since at the general judgment (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08552a.htm) all the works of men (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm) will be submitted to judgment, it will behoove every man (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm) to be cognizant then of all his works. Wherefore each man's (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm) conscience (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm) will be as a book containing his deeds (http://newadvent.org/cathen/01115a.htm) on which judgment will be pronounced, even as in the human (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm) court of law (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09053a.htm) we make use of records. Of these books it is written in the Apocalypse (20:12 (http://newadvent.org/bible/rev020.htm)): "The books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books [Vulgate (http://newadvent.org/cathen/15515b.htm): 'book'], according to their works." According to Augustine's (http://newadvent.org/cathen/02084a.htm) exposition (De Civ. Dei xx) the books which are here said to be opened "denote the saints (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm) of the New (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm) and Old Testaments (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14526a.htm) in whom God's (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) commandments are exemplified." Hence Richard of St. Victor (http://newadvent.org/cathen/13045c.htm) (De judic. potest.) says: "Their hearts will be like the code of law (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09053a.htm)." But the book of life, of which the text goes on to speak, signifies each one's conscience (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm), which is said to be one single book, because the one Divine power will cause (http://newadvent.org/cathen/03459a.htm) all to recall their deeds (http://newadvent.org/cathen/01115a.htm), and this energy, in so far as it reminds a man of his deeds (http://newadvent.org/cathen/01115a.htm), is called the "book of life" [Cf. I:24:1 ad 1 (http://newadvent.org/summa/1024.htm#article1)]. Or else we may refer the first books to the conscience (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm), and by the second book we may understand the Judge's sentence as expressed in His providence (http://newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm)
Article 2.
On the contrary, A gloss (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06586a.htm) on 1 Corinthians 4:5 (http://newadvent.org/bible/1co004.htm#verse5), "will . . . bring to light the hidden things of darkness," says: "Deeds (http://newadvent.org/cathen/01115a.htm) and thoughts both good (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06636b.htm) and evil (http://newadvent.org/cathen/05649a.htm) will then be revealed and made known (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) to all."
Further, the past sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) of all the good (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06636b.htm) will be equally blotted out. Yet we know (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) the sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) of some saints (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm), for instance of Magdalen (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm), Peter (http://newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm), and David. Therefore in like manner the sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) of the other elect will be known (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm), and much more those of the damned.
I answer that, At the last and general judgment (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08552a.htm) it behooves the Divine justice (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08571c.htm), which now is in many ways hidden, to appear evidently to all. Now the sentence of one who condemns or rewards cannot be just (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08571c.htm), unless it be delivered according to merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm) and demerits. Therefore just as it behooves both judge and jury to know (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) the merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm) of a case, in order to deliver a just verdict, so is it necessary (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10733a.htm), in order that the sentence appear to be just (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08571c.htm), that all who know (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) the sentence should be acquainted with the merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm). Hence, since every one will know (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) of his reward or condemnation, so will every one else know (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) of it, and consequently as each one will recall his own merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm) or demerits, so will he be cognizant of those of others. This is the more probable and more common opinion, although the Master (http://newadvent.org/cathen/11768d.htm) (Sent. iv, D, 43) says the contrary, namely that a man's sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) blotted out by repentance will not be made known (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) to others at the judgment. But it would follow from this that neither would his repentance for these sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) be perfectly known (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm), which would detract considerably from the glory (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06585a.htm) of the saints (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm) and the praise due to God (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) for having so mercifully delivered them.
Reply to Objection 1. All the preceding merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm) or demerits will come to a certain amount in the glory (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06585a.htm) or unhappiness of each one rising again. Consequently through eternal (http://newadvent.org/cathen/05551b.htm) things being seen, all things in their consciences (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04268a.htm) will be visible, especially as the Divine power will conduce to this so that the Judge's sentence may appear just to all.
Reply to Objection 2. It will be possible for a man's merits (http://newadvent.org/cathen/10202b.htm) or demerits to be made known (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) by their effects as stated above (Article 1, Reply to Objection 1 (http://newadvent.org/summa/5087.htm#article1)), or by the power of God (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm), although the power of the created (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04470a.htm) intellect (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08066a.htm) is not sufficient for this.
Reply to Objection 3. The manifestation of his sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) to the confusion of the sinner is a result of his neglect in omitting to confess them. But that the sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) of the saints (http://newadvent.org/cathen/04171a.htm) be revealed cannot be to their confusion or shame, as neither does it bring confusion to Mary Magdalen (http://newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm) that her sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) are publicly recalled in the Church (http://newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm), because shame is "fear of disgrace," as Damascene (http://newadvent.org/cathen/08459b.htm) says (De Fide Orth. ii), and this will be impossible in the blessed. But this manifestation will bring them great glory (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06585a.htm) on account of the penance they did, even as the confessor hails a man who courageously (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06147a.htm) confesses great crimes. Sins (http://newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm) are said to be blotted out because God (http://newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) sees them not for the purpose of punishing them.
-----
So Thomas differs from Peter Lombard here slightly and says we'll know based on merit and demerit.
It's not perfectly clear still the mode by which we will know other's sins we may only know them insofar as the effects of them brought God glory.
Interesting topic regardless, one which I think about a lot.
-
Can someone post the link to where Fr. Ripperger says that?
Since I'm the one that brought it up, here's one of the several times he says it. In this talk, it starts at about 27:27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VordQa0Oho (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VordQa0Oho)
I see the complete logic of condemned souls being exposed publicly at the GJ, but I do not see the logic of "answering to all the Heavenly Court" by the souls destined for Heaven.
There are other talks where he mentions it, and I will probably run across those, as well, and will post them then.
-
Ascetik,
Thank you for your reply #58. I know that Fr. Wolfe's statements about this are contained in one of the 16 sermons titled Our Lady of Revelation. It's in 16 parts, although his style is to do a ton of recapping, as a teaching tool. I will investigate later this week in which of those 16 his statement about the different way the sins of the damned will be revealed versus the sins of the saved (that is, at the General Judgment) is contained.
-
It appears that the demon recognizes the authority of the local bishop.
The really tough question would be: Would the demon recognize the authority of Cardinal Blase Cupich who promotes adultery by giving communion to public adulterers?
If that is so the complete hierarchy has to be recognized no matter what they believe in. In the end the church becomes a heretical brothel.
Following any NO priest is very dangerous in this day and age.
-
In the end the church becomes a heretical brothel.
Jesus said: "Thou are Peter and upon this rock I found my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it."
Like you, we are all suffering to see our holy mother Church being dragged through the mud by heretics. But regardless of how horrific the situation is from our puny human perspective, God is in control. He will not be mocked. His time is not our time. (A day is as a thousand years to the Lord, and a thousand years is as a day.) We can offer up our suffering to Him as we pray for the restoration of the Church, and pray for the salvation of souls who are misled by heretics.
We have Jesus's word that the gates of hell will not PREVAIL against the Church He founded.
-
We have Jesus's word that the gates of hell will not PREVAIL against the Church He founded.
Yes, but there will be a huge falling off (2 Thess. 2), the abomination of desolation will stand in the holy place (Mt 24), the continual sacrifice shall be taken away (Mt 24,15 => Dan 12), and the rest of the holy people will be scattered (Dan 12). In the last days before the return of Christ there will be a time of tribulation as never has been before (Dan 12).
St. John Chrysostom in the Opus imperfectum on Matthew in Homily XLIX on Mt 24 says that the destruction of the Church will parallel the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70. The hosts of Titus in A.D. 70 are hosts of heretics at that time. Most Jєωs were killed in A.D. 70, and the rest scattered all over the world. Most Catholics will be spiritually killed at that time, and the rest scattered all over the world.
Looks to me like what we see today.
Yes, the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church. But only a small number of believers will be left: "And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened." (Mt 24,22)
-
Yes, but there will be a huge falling off (2 Thess. 2), the abomination of desolation will stand in the holy place (Mt 24), the continual sacrifice shall be taken away (Mt 24,15 => Dan 12), and the rest of the holy people will be scattered (Dan 12). In the last days before the return of Christ there will be a time of tribulation as never has been before (Dan 12).
St. John Chrysostom in the Opus imperfectum on Matthew in Homily XLIX on Mt 24 says that the destruction of the Church will parallel the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70. The hosts of Titus in A.D. 70 are hosts of heretics at that time. Most Jєωs were killed in A.D. 70, and the rest scattered all over the world. Most Catholics will be spiritually killed at that time, and the rest scattered all over the world.
Looks to me like what we see today.
Yes, the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church. But only a small number of believers will be left: "And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened." (Mt 24,22)
I agree with all of your points. I disagree with King Wenceslas who said: (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/msg660351/#msg660351)
In the end the church becomes a heretical brothel.
-
The really tough question would be: Would the demon recognize the authority of Cardinal Blase Cupich who promotes adultery by giving communion to public adulterers?
If that is so the complete hierarchy has to be recognized no matter what they believe in. In the end the church becomes a heretical brothel.
Following any NO priest is very dangerous in this day and age.
Isn't it possible to differentiate between the Church, and the bad men who are comprise the hierarchy? (Though not all clergy in the conciliar church are bad).
Archbishop Lefebvre believed that the Church is occupied by a Modernist sect. No one has to accept his word as the final word on the issue, but what he suggests, to me, seems to be that it's not the "Church" that's the problem, but rather the Modernists who are using the Church to further their agenda.
-
I agree with all of your points. I disagree with King Wenceslas who said: (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/msg660351/#msg660351)
In the end the church becomes a heretical brothel.
Right, it's not the Church, it's just most members falling off.
-
Fr. Ripperger then served up a some ice cold Full Communion Kool Aid, saying:
This negative attitude towards the Magisterium is one of the reasons why the Magisterium has been so slow to give us anything because people have had such a negative attitude, they’re just like, well, we have to be careful with what we’re giving these people because you know they’re gonna end up biting the hand that feeds them.
I’m not buying this for a second. There is only one reason why the so-called “Magisterium” of today (i.e., the hierarchy of today) does not “give us anything” authentically Catholic and genuinely nourishing for the soul, and that is because they are largely hirelings of the conciliar church-of-man who have not the true faith. Period.
To hear Fr. Ripperger speak one would imagine that some substantial number of the bishops of today actually have a genuine desire to lead the flock in the way of tradition, but it is the attitude of the faithful that is preventing it. The idea is absurd.
Wow, he's really gone off the rails.
-
https://akacatholic.com/fr-ripperger-defender-of-tradition-or-company-man/
We have to stop detracting against the Magisterium. Okay, why? Because in the end it destroys people’s ability to the virtue of piety. How you can expect people to want to submit themselves to Christ’s legitimate authority, handed on through the Magisterium, if you’re constantly running down the bishops and the priests and the Pope and things of that sort.
If Father Ripperger actually said that I would be shocked, however I followed the link given and no original source is given, nor can I find the purported statement anywhere else.
-
I found it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hvS5C6XOSc
at 7:53
sounds quite different IN CONTEXT