albeit, with a level of skepticism.

Why skepticism? Because the notion that demons must tell the truth to exorcists originates with Novus Ordo priests like this, to my knowledge.

To be clear, I don’t suggest any dishonesty by Ripperger. I think he believes that he has the power to compel demons to tell the truth.

But, I think he’s mistaken. I think, from what I’ve read, exorcists prior to Vatican II had no interest in conversing with demons, because back then the learned priests knew very well that even the dumbest demon has a perfect memory, perfect intellect, and can manipulate even exorcists like a child.

Especially prideful ones.

Nevertheless, someone sent me the link. I read it because I think Ripperger has some good insights on spirituality sometimes. But, my trust for anyone who calls BerGog “pope” is extremely limited. Still, I read with an open mind.

Until this point.

How stupid.

Neither the governments, the politicians, nor the demons riding them are “panicking” in any way, shape, or form. If I didn’t like Ripperger a little bit, I’d accuse him of lurking the Qanon message boards.

What a disappointing confirmation of bullshit. I’d much prefer some sort of validation of Novus Ordo consecrations and ordinations. But, no, this is what we get.

What nonsense.

Opus Dei strikes again.

12 thoughts on “I Read This Ripperger Interview With Some Interest …”

  1. Good for me to learn exorcists avoided conversing with demons prior to Vatican II, & a great point by 5000 about Jesus silencing the demons. It puts Ripperger into a new perspective.
    So he’s been playing Saruman the White from LotR by looking into the crystal ball.

    I watched a few older videos of his a year ago.
    In one he said he asked a demon why he was in the lower back of the man.
    The demon said he loathes him, but is restricted to the lower back, and cannot enter elsewhere.
    Ripperger was surprised & thought God was restricting access to the lower back.

    This really struck a chord, as at the time I’d only gotten over chronic lower back pain I’d had for 15years.
    I already guessed my old sins were haunting me, but now I thought this could have been done via a demon? In any case, praying the Rosary had led to my unexpected recovery.

    Perhaps the prayers returned enough grace to evict a minor demon?

    Another story he said was that exorcists world wide reported exorcisms that would take 2-3 days, were taking up to a year post-vatican II.

    At the time I thought if he knows the truth, then why doesn’t he leave the Novus Ordo?
    To discover he’s spoken such bollocks about freemasons just trying their best but failing explains why he has stayed with them.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. There are examples of pre conciliar priests conversing with them during exorcisms, but few. There are also admonition against it, though I can’t remember the references at the moment.

      I think exorcisms are taking longer because they’re being conducted with laymen who have no faculties or jurisdiction.

      Laypeople can cast out demons. Happened often in the early Church.

      So, I don’t dismiss everything Ripperger says. I don’t think he’s a liar. He could be, I suppose, but I don’t think so. I just think his pride has led him astray and allowed him to be deceived.

      Like

      Reply

  2. I used to find it Very Important and Very Interesting to piece together these supposed-truths gained from demons during exorcisms. It felt good to have my ideas about the Faith confirmed, and if I was honest, I was motivated by vain curiosity and even a gnostic seeking of hidden knowledge. But Christ silenced the demons even when they spoke the truth; He rejected their testimony. It’s a bad move to dialogue with demons or to seek information from them even when we think it can be used for good. This is how I see it now.
    As an aside, one of the “big truths disclosed by a demon under duress” was that JPII is the second-biggest spiritual powerhouse to invoke against them. So… take from that what you will.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. I think the reason Trads ignore the inherent problem with trying to extract the truth from demons is because liberals and cuckservatives like Mark Shea are the ones most critical of it. But Fr. Ripperger should be accepted or rejected based on his own (de)merits.

    For one thing, when confronted with the very real problems plaguing NuChurch he reverts to the standard PartyTrad line of “don’t criticize the bishops, Bergoglio is Pope” and does the gaslighting tactic of blaming Catholics for the suppression of the Sacraments in the opening act of the VirusWar. (He forgets that the rot starts from the head). Also, his teaching of “generational spirits” may be a novelty.

    Ultimately I don’t want to defame the character of anyone who has the power to absolve my sins especially considering how hard (really, impossible) it is to propagate the Faith without clerics formed in the Old Rite.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. This touches on a major criticism I have of his “demonology.” He asserts that we have granted jurisdiction to the major primary demons through such things as Roe v. Wade, homosexual marriage, etc. He lists a demon for each. But, secular politicians cannot cede jurisdiction – not unless they were a Holy Roman Emperor granted such authority by the Church.

      No, the jurisdiction has been granted by the BISHOPS, and all since Vatican II. He knows this, but blames politics.

      Like

      Reply

      1. As a tangent, I don’t think most Catholics in America are ready to embrace the fact that this country, from its inception, was a template for a Luciferian world empire. They see its material success as a rebuke of the Novohispanic model (based on Catholic social doctrine), yet forget that Lot chose Sodom after his dispute with Abram because that land was richer. We all know how that story ends.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  4. I’ve become more and more skeptical of Fr. Ripperger the past year and a half. The nail in the coffin for me was one day turning on a talk he gave on dealing with sadness/negativity. His primary advice was “ignore the thing that makes you sad.” Aside from the fact that I have to imagine there are probably more Catholic ways to deal with sadness and depression (though I’m admittedly no expert on mental health), the example he gave was for this was the crisis in the Church – he used a bunch of fancy words to basically describe traditionalist concerns as disordered and was effectively discouraging his audience from focusing on them.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  5. “I’d much prefer some sort of validation of Novus Ordo consecrations and ordinations.”

    I was both pleased and mildly surprised to see which truth you would have the priest press from a demon, during a dangerously off-topic, and unlikely conversation during an exorcism. It is a far more pressing issue for the salvation of souls.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Oh, I wouldn’t seek that confirmation from a demon – I’d just like to see it generally in the power & faith of the Novus Ordo priests.

      I have zero interest in hearing what any demon would say about anything, as enticing as that can be.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment