He calls St. Albert the Great the "Great Bastard" and he says that St. Thomas Aquinas was a notorious heretic who is in Hell right now. He talks bad about Scholasticism and he says how it was against the Church Fathers and that it ridiculed them and that the people of the time wanted to stop this "ridiculing of the Fathers" etc.

I still haven't seen some article or whatever that specifies all his charges against Scholasticism, all i have seen are sporadic attacks against it.

Does anyone know what the deal is?

The man is a nut case.  That is part of the reason.  You should stay as far away from him as possible.  

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Pelele

He calls St. Albert the Great the "Great Bastard" and he says that St. Thomas Aquinas was a notorious heretic who is in Hell right now. He talks bad about Scholasticism and he says how it was against the Church Fathers and that it ridiculed them and that the people of the time wanted to stop this "ridiculing of the Fathers" etc.

I still haven't seen some article or whatever that specifies all his charges against Scholasticism, all i have seen are sporadic attacks against it.

Does anyone know what the deal is?

The man is a nut case.  That is part of the reason.  You should stay as far away from him as possible.  

I know that, but i just wanted to know just what it is that he says so i can tell others and in case i ever run into his followers i can tell them something.

Good question.  I have not followed him for so long that I have no idea.  I feel like merely giving him press is making him seem more worthy than he is.

You could say you are not sure of his reasoning and are not interested in it as it contradicts the approved theology of the Catholic Church.  The Popes held the theology of Thomas Aquinas above all.  When someone contradicts that we should not pay attention.

You could start asking him questions.  Why do you put weight into what RI says? How about going to secure pre Vatican 2 sources?  What are his credentials?  

Quote from: Pelele

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Pelele

He calls St. Albert the Great the "Great Bastard" and he says that St. Thomas Aquinas was a notorious heretic who is in Hell right now. He talks bad about Scholasticism and he says how it was against the Church Fathers and that it ridiculed them and that the people of the time wanted to stop this "ridiculing of the Fathers" etc.

I still haven't seen some article or whatever that specifies all his charges against Scholasticism, all i have seen are sporadic attacks against it.

Does anyone know what the deal is?

The man is a nut case.  That is part of the reason.  You should stay as far away from him as possible.  

I know that, but i just wanted to know just what it is that he says so i can tell others and in case i ever run into his followers i can tell them something.

Good question.  I have not followed him for so long that I have no idea.  I feel like merely giving him press is making him seem more worthy than he is.

You could say you are not sure of his reasoning and are not interested in it as it contradicts the approved theology of the Catholic Church.  The Popes held the theology of Thomas Aquinas above all.  When someone contradicts that we should not pay attention.

You could start asking him questions.  Why do you put weight into what RI says? How about going to secure pre Vatican 2 sources?  What are his credentials?  

What are your credentials? (I don't recognize him as catholic but I am pointing out the keyboard theologian hypocrisy.

First of all the man is so filled with pride, he claims supernatural revelation. He talks to His Guardian Angel and gives ways too many details of his own personal spiritual life... Reeking of the worst form of pride...

The Saints gave testimony as to their great learning, to call St. Thomas Aquinas anything but a luminary is abominable, seriously. That guy is beyond nuts. He calls canonized Saints, let me remind you Canonized Saints since the 1100's and forward stuff that you would not even call to a prostitute or public sinner. In fact I can't even repeat some of the horse manure that comes out of his potty mouth, because I would sin against the most basic form of human decency.

On top of that he calls all of this things to people who had magisterial approval for centuries, gave witness to their mission from God through both great learning and holiness. Many times through great miracles, gift of prophecy and so forth. What has he done? If the Church has been wrong for the past 900 years why has he not proven himself of his Divine Mandate to preach to all corners of the world through miracles (he certainly claims that jurisdiction). RI exemplifies is the worst possible case of a Sola Denzingerite  . What is amazing that the guy was accepted into MHFM for such a long time... I mean that really shows you what sort of demonic spirits dwell inside that place, wow. I mean he is as bad as it can get...

In the first place he is making the claim that everyone else has been apostate, even men that have clearly been blessed by Almighty God through Holiness and miracles... So in order to prove without the shadow of a doubt that he is truly from God he would have to outdo all the previous Saints in their greatness. This man is possessed of the devil truly... This is truly self-evident... To defend that man as Catholic is the equivalent of apostasy... There are few times where I can say that with confidence and mostly everyone in this forum would agree with moral unanimity with this statement.

In many of his videos he starts by saying "In fact i just spoke with him this morning", referring to Jesus obviously.

I know the man is just off the charts but i am just interested to know just why he opposes scholasticism, i don't want to know to see if he "convinces" me about it or anything of course.

Is it because of the whole "St. Thomas reconciled Aristotle with Catholicism" thing? Is it because St. Thomas used the pagan philosophers?

Some of the things he said about astrology did disturb me though, because he quoted Dr. Ludwig's Life of the Popes so i know he didn't make it up.

Ludwig said most of the people in that time were very influenced by astrology and that Julius II made his coronation date coincide with some astrological thing.

How in the world were Catholics and even Popes influenced by that demonic nonsense?

He has condemned Sts. Thomas, Albertus Magnus, Bellarmine, More, Lisieux , Alphonsus and many others.

I think he wasn't like that when he lived with the Dimonds, supposedly he was subject to Fred Dimond and he would be silent when he ordered him to. I think he started to come up with all those things since 2007 or thereabouts.

RJMI has stated that he left MHFM because he held the sedevacantist position before they did. He also correctly knew that the Catholic Church prohibits receiving sacraments from heretics. Mhfm goes to a V2 church to receive sacraments, which is evil and illogical.

Interesting how far back does this guy go with MHFM?

Now how does it matter if he held the SV'ist position before anyone really matter? This is something that you see from MHFM, the importance of how "they came to this or that idea" first. As if it mattered who came up with it seriously, its not about "us" but the faith. Any emphasis to ourselves only diminishes the importance of the message, we are nothing but true dung. It is only through the grace that we become something and all good things must be attributed to God the source of all Goodness itself.

If you could be able to give me a little history of Richard Ibryani and MHFM would be greatly appreciated. The only thing that I know is that I have seen him in some of the videos they have in some conferences they held a while back. I don't even know what year it was, but it looks like a good time back.

If that is the only place where he has to go to receive sacraments, that is fine. I would agree that for 99% of cases inside of the Conciliar Church all of them would be material heretics, but to go so far as to absolutely Universally apply this to each individual without any knowledge whether the particular priest is pertinaciously otherwise known as formally heretical is absurd (which I am guessing at this point would be Eastern Rite for MHFM). I think that they probably have some close independent priest who is validly ordained, but they would prefer to go to Eastern Rite Conciliarist priest, then a SV'ist priest. I don't know there particular inner workings or situation, but it does seem like something strange is going on. It is not the spirit of God or the spirit of the religious life, they have no clue what it means to live like a monk. They should have chosen some other Order, but from what I am aware of real Benedictine monks despite the coming of the end of the world, EVEN IF IMMINENT will continue their God given duty of praying the Divine Office in community EVERY DAY without fail.

Why does he hate scholasticism, quite simple. Instead of attempting to reconcile the true meaning of Trent with regards to BOD they accept its literal meaning regarding it. So they anathematize Trent and every single canonized Saint, because they contradicted the EENS Dogma in his eyes... MHFM at the very least attempts to show that Trent is not in contradiction with the EENS doctrine, but this guy just trumps anyone who disagrees with him. He is truly the Pope of his Church, what a heretical schismatic devil he is. Which is completely absurd how this guy is so sure of all the supernatural revelations he is receiving, he has 0 discernment. Most of the Saints never desired to have any visions or anything like that happen to them, because they were always wary who it might really be. Even the best of mystics have been deceived as St. John of the Cross writes.

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Pelele

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Pelele

He calls St. Albert the Great the "Great Bastard" and he says that St. Thomas Aquinas was a notorious heretic who is in Hell right now. He talks bad about Scholasticism and he says how it was against the Church Fathers and that it ridiculed them and that the people of the time wanted to stop this "ridiculing of the Fathers" etc.

I still haven't seen some article or whatever that specifies all his charges against Scholasticism, all i have seen are sporadic attacks against it.

Does anyone know what the deal is?

The man is a nut case.  That is part of the reason.  You should stay as far away from him as possible.  

I know that, but i just wanted to know just what it is that he says so i can tell others and in case i ever run into his followers i can tell them something.

Good question.  I have not followed him for so long that I have no idea.  I feel like merely giving him press is making him seem more worthy than he is.

You could say you are not sure of his reasoning and are not interested in it as it contradicts the approved theology of the Catholic Church.  The Popes held the theology of Thomas Aquinas above all.  When someone contradicts that we should not pay attention.

You could start asking him questions.  Why do you put weight into what RI says? How about going to secure pre Vatican 2 sources?  What are his credentials?  

What are your credentials? (I don't recognize him as catholic but I am pointing out the keyboard theologian hypocrisy.

I don't disagree with Thomas Aquinas or Catholic theology as he does.  I don't need credentials to do that.  If you hold yourself above Aquinas you better show me your credentials.

Is this person even Catholic?

No.