Richard, Can you give a short preview of what's in the lecture? The video is one hour and 18 minutes-plus; right now I can't watch it, but it's a topic I am interested in.
Sorry, Richard, but the first ten minutes shows the good priest to have a very good voice and a nice way of speaking but the errors in his comments about the Medjugorje situation show him to be fairly ignorant.
Harper, I realize that you directed your question to Richard and I hope he answers it. I do want to say that this very worth while to listen to (or watch - I even noticed a picture of Mark Mallett if I'm not mistaken). The lecturer discusses a lot of things in relation to apparitions. He uses examples of various approved apparitions (Fatima, Lourdes, La Salette and some others). At around the 38min mark a Q&A session begins but before that he is basically giving you tips to determine if the apparition if from heaven or not. He is indirectly stating that Medjugorje is not authentic. I suggest that you at least watch the first 38mins, this in my opinion is the best part and the most difficult to summarize. During the Q&A : He discusses demonic possession since he performs exorcisms. He also gives some parenting tips. And briefly discusses divine providence. He states that a woman's worst defect is controlling their husband and that men need to avoid feminancy(sp?) and need chastity. How the saints are good role models. He talks about the 1947 Tre Fontani (Bruno) and how he would love to see the documents on this apparition. He confirms that Russia has not been consecrated and states that this has not been done because we have not prayed for the pope to have the grace to do so. He states that the scripture when Jesus drives the demons into the pigs was to demonstrate that Christ ultimately determines what happens to demons, that demons can possess animals and how demons can move from one thing to another. He says to have some food stocked up, maybe even up to a year's worth for the chastisement is ok but it may not insure anything (of course). When to introduce modesty to your children. He says the primary vice of Americans is greed. Other problems are constant texting, sexual acts contrary to nature in young people, porn. He states that Saint Thomas says that you can say something bad about someone if it is accurate, it should proceed from charity and be necessary. PS - He says no to Harry Potter. PPS- I can't believe that he said, "Joe Sch..." .
Fr. Chad Ripperger has a PhD and was a member of the faculty of Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Nebraska. One of his books lists him as a member of F.S.S.P. He is now a priest and exorcist in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He has written some apparently heavyweight books, listed here: http://www.sensustraditionis.org/books.html I am sure he would be very interested in your thoughts as to his errors and ignorance. If you go to the Diocese of Tulsa website, there is contact information. Please share his response with us.
SH, Your avatar is of Medjugorje, correct? If yes, what is your opinion on what he says about Medjugorje? I thought his only comments that were directly related were about the 3 bishops who found nothing supernatural, he seems like he is waiting for the Vatican to make a final decision. The video shows a picture of Medjugorje when he talks about apparitions that go on and on for years and don't really state anything substantial. He also states that the blessed mother is normally known for saying very little. Both of those comments seem to be negatively reflected on Medjugorje. David, I should have asked you on another thread but what do you mean about the sunlight in one of the seers eyes? I guess that you believe in Medjugorje? I lean towards a disbelief in this one but not certain. I am always interested in hearing others points of view, not looking for a debate - I am on the fence plain and simple.
Yes my avatar is of Medjugorje. Not everyone is going to agree on everything, and even the most supported apparitions are controversial at best. Father Amorth is the worlds most renowned Exorcist and he supports Medjugorje fully. Its hard for people to understand Medjugorje until they go there and experience it for themselves. That being said I have gleaned a lot of invaluable information from Fr. Ripperger that I have learned no where else.
You sound a lot like myself, I also agree to disagree. Like I stated I like to hear other's opinions, it helps me learn as much as I can.
Very interesting lecture. Everything he says makes sense. I wasn't sure whether I had heard of the apparitions at Tre Fontane so I did a search and found this: http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/approved/appariti/trefonta.html At the bottome of the page: "The Franciscan Conventual Friars Minor were given custody of the grotto in July 1956, and asked to construct a chapel at the site, in addition to administering the shrine. Since then, a prayer to the Virgin of Revelation has been given an imprimatur by the Vicariate of Rome, and the cult was so well recognized that, during Vatican II, numerous prelates went to Tre Fontane to pray. In 1987, on the fortieth anniversary of the apparition, Cardinal Poletti, the Cardinal Vicar of Rome, and thus the Pope's official episcopal representative for the diocese, came to the shrine to celebrate Mass. However, a definitive judgement, either positive or negative in regard of Tre Fontane, has not been made. This is probably due, at least in part, to the character of Bruno Cornacchiola; it seems that he went on to claim a total of 28 further apparitions by 1986, with messages which became increasingly apocalyptic in tone, including predictions of various evils which have not materialized. It also seems that he has not been completely truthful in his biography. This is like the tragic history of Mélanie at La Salette; her initial experience was trustworthy, but she allowed events to go to her head in later years." Fr. sounded so convinced about the authenticity of the apparitions at Tre Fontane and La Salette, I'm wondering whether he is aware of the part that I have underlined above. He did say in the lecture that sometimes the initial apparition can be genuine but matters can go astray later. I'm wondering whether the apocalyptic tone of the messages came after the apparition had received their initial approval. The La Salette children were each given a secret which they were told not to divulge but were eventually made known to Pius IX. Does anyone know whether those secrets were ever published?
Sorry, David, but everything Father Ripperger has said regarding Medjugorje is factually correct. There is much wisdom is Father Ripperger's lecture for those with ears to hear.
They were published. I like this article....http://motheofgod.com/threads/new-defense-of-la-salette.6572/
The priest states quite specifically and clearly (at about 6 minutes into the video) that "3 bishops have consistently said nothing supernatural is happening" Unfortunately, there have only been 2 bishops of Mostar since the apparitions began. The present bishop, Bishop Peric, is the second. A fairly fundamental blunder which you also seem to have missed! The priest's subsequent comments on Medjugorje are a real mix of the vague and misleading. He states, "when Rome decided to 'take a look at it'". Well, depending on precisely what he is referring to when he says that, he is at best misleading. The first time 'Rome took a look at Medjugorje' was when Pope John Paul got Arbhbishop Bertone of the CDF to issue, in 1998, this letter: "What Bishop Peric said in his letter to the Secretary General of FamilleChretienne, declaring: "My conviction and my position is not only 'non constat de supernaturalitate', but likewise, 'constat de non supernaturalitate' of the apparitions or revelations in Medjugorje", should be considered the expression of the personal conviction of the Bishop of Mostar which he has the right to express as Ordinary of the place, but which is and remains his personal opinion." Of course, since then, there has been a major commission on Medjugorje to investigate everything. This rather undermines the whole thesis of this priest who seems to believe that God gives the power of true discernment to the local bishop.
Carol, I am fine with anyone who is unsure about Medjugorje because, like with Pope Francis, there is so much negativity being put out there that it is maybe a bit difficult for people to view things in a simple way. The real proof of the authenticity of Medjugorje comes from the conversions that come from it. With regard to the video of Mirjana, at various moments during the apparition the sun shines directly into one or other of her eyes. If you or I were in that situation it would be almost impossible to keep staring with full open eyes in the same direction.
I'm not sure you found a smoking gun, David. He probably simply misspoke. Two local bishops, plus a decision by the Yugoslavian Bishops Conference. Three "local" authorities. Also, I thought (and I'm not going to go back and listen again) Fr. Ripperger discussed the gift of discernment as necessarily given to the Church, and therefore available to a bishop in exercise of his office. He was describing how the Church operates, not directly commenting on the way Bishop Peric conducted himself (you can always reject grace). He was clear about Rome taking precedence if it intervenes. BTW, I have been to Medjugorje and organized Medjugorje events at home. I no longer do so since the 2013 announcement. Finally, David, if you remain concerned, why not write Fr. Ripperger? Distinguished scholars are often willing to discuss their work with members of the public.
You obviously didn't listen to what Father Ripperger said. He said that the local bishop has primary authority over an alleged private revelation . He then said that unless the Vatican intervenes, the decision of the local bishop is always primary. He then said that in the case of Medjugorje the Vatican has intervened but that the Vatican panel that looked at Medjugorje has upheld the decisions of the local bishops. Those remarks begin at around the 5:20 mark in the video. Regarding whether there were two or three bishops who ruled on Medjugorje, it would actually be three when you factor in the fact that there was indeed a joint Commission by Bishop Zanic and Cardinal Kuharic.
This is not true. The real proof of the authencity of any private revelation comes from the decision of the local bishop or relevant Church authority. A private revelation can yield many conversions and still be false. The devil will tolerate a few good fruits if in the end he can sow disobedience to Church authority.
What I stated in my post does not conflict with what you have written above. Both you and Harper excuse the priest's error regarding the number of bishops by a neat bit of intellectual footwork but his error actually betrays the fact that the priest is really not too familiar with the Medjugorje situation. His comments about Rome's involvement confirms that. The Vatican withdrew the authority to judge from Bishop Peric and that remains the situation to this day. Furthermore, what Fr Ripperger says in the video is rather extraordinary. He says "it doesn't matter if the bishop is evil, it really doesn't. It is the nature of the office that gives him the grace to discern properly" providing he uses due diligence. Well, did Bishop Peric fail in due diligence? Fortunately, thanks to Pope John Paul II and then Pope Benedict, the whole discernment process has been removed from the bishop and any decision or further action will come from the Vatican. As the apparitions continue it is virtually certain that the Vatican will not authenticate Medjugorje but may give it the status of a shrine. But there is enough opposition to contemporary apparitions within the Vatican to make even that option probably unlikely. What is clear is that the Commission set up to investigate the whole situation has not found any serious problems.
I have to disagree 100% with you on that one. Conversion of a soul goes against the devil's very being. The thirty odd years of Medjugorje have born overwhelmingly good fruit on a massive scale. You and all those who oppose the apparitions will always deny that but it remains the truth.
