After all this time, Donald Hartley has finally admitted what all of us have known for months. He is a formal heretic who rejects the truth of the Catholic faith just as surely as Martin Luther did. After running from the clear and undeniable facts for endless months, Donald was forced to finally confront them. Like any narcissist, he tried shamelessly to turn his vice into apparent virtue. In doing so, he vindicated me by showing the depth of his depravity, dishonesty and blatant disregard for straightforward catholic teaching.
In attempting to defend his indefensible promotion of yet another publicly condemned event, Hartley said the following:
Case in point, the alleged reported vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary at San Damiano Italy (1961-1970) is given a "negative decision" without explanation (The Miracle Hunter). Did the Bishop disbelieve the visions to be authentic, that nothing supernatural is recognized. Did the Bishop believe the story was fradulant, that the story was full of deceptions? Did the Bishop question this was a money making scheme? Did he conclude that there was no evidence to support such a claim? Even though the Bishop gives a negative decision, he does not permit priests to travel there and offer Mass. He does not want pilgrimages to travel there. In saying this, the Bishop does not outright condemn the San Damiano reported visions. In the Catholic world news does travel and the story gets out there word of mouth. Anti-Catholics like John Benko automatically pushes that if there is a negative decision or no decision that the visions are "condemned".
Let's take this remarkably dishonest diatribe apart piece by piece, shall we?
Case in point, the alleged reported vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary at San Damiano Italy (1961-1970) is given a "negative decision" without explanation (The Miracle Hunter). Did the Bishop disbelieve the visions to be authentic, that nothing supernatural is recognized.
Yes. and He says so, quite clearly:
1. Once again I express the negative judgement already more times declared by my Venerable Predecessor and by myself regarding the so called happenings of St. Damiano and which I again stress have no supernatural foundation.
Did the Bishop believe the story was fradulant, that the story was full of deceptions? Did the Bishop question this was a money making scheme? Did he conclude that there was no evidence to support such a claim?
One cannot help but be stunned at the gall of Hartley demanding that the Bishop give him a full play-by-play account of his decision. Hartley is not entitled to anything from this Bishop. What the Bishop does do is make his decision and his instructions crystal clear.
2. No act of cult to the Blessed Virgin, connected with those presumed apparitions and messages, may be licitly practiced and encouraged.
3. Those who advertise through writings in order to propagate such events, or who organize pilgrimages or go to St. Damiano for devotional reasons are in blatant disobedience to the Church
The words of this Bishop are strikingly- even frighteningly- clear. Hartley's arrogance is just as clear.
Even though the Bishop gives a negative decision, he does not permit priests to travel there and offer Mass. He does not want pilgrimages to travel there. In saying this, the Bishop does not outright condemn the San Damiano reported visions.
The truth- as any reader can discern- is the exact opposite of what Hartley contends. To make sure there is no misunderstanding on this, let's go through line by line.
5. In the whole Diocese I renew the following dispositions:
a) Priests from outside the Diocese going to St. Damiano for such a devotional reason must not be permitted to celebrate Mass, and if they dared to do it, they are suspended 'a divinis'.
Priests celebrating Mass there will be stripped of the faculties for their disobedience! That is about as forceful a sanction as you could ask for. By the way, the exact same stripping of priestly faculties occurred at the king of demonic sites- Medjugorje.
b) To the Priests and religious going to St. Damiano Holy communion is to be refused.
They not only may not celebrate Mass but they cannot receive Our Lord in the Eucharist either. They are not only defrocked but excommunicated as well!
This -also- happened to the priests at the demonic apparitions in Medjugorje.
6. I invite the Rectors of the Churches, including those administered by Religious and at times frequented by groups of 'pilgrims of St. Damiano' to give an adequate instruction to enlighten them on true devotion to the Blessed Virgin and on the obedience to the legitimate Authority of the Church according to the doctrine of the Second Vatican Council and in conformity with the Canon Law.
This is a thundering condemnation. The Bishop, with blistering clarity, is calling devotion to San Damiano a false devotion to Mary and a rejection of the legitimate authority of the church, the Vatican and Canon law. It would be difficult to imagine a stronger condemnation.
Yet liar Don Hartley has the unmitigated gall to say the following:
In saying this, the Bishop does not outright condemn the San Damiano reported visions.
Oh, but Hartley is not done making himself look like a fool. He then goes after me with yet another slander:
In the Catholic world news does travel and the story gets out there word of mouth. Anti-Catholics like John Benko automatically pushes that if there is a negative decision or no decision that the visions are "condemned".
What kind of equivocation game is Hartley trying to play here? If a negative decision is not a condemnation, what would be? A negative judgement is a condemnation. If the Bishop approves the event, continued devotion is licit. If the Bishop neither approves nor condemns the event, continued devotion may be licit.
That is not what happens here. The Bishop's words are as clear as crystal. To say that this is not an outright condemnation is to insult the intelligence of all 10 of the world wide readers of his blog.
2. No act of cult to the Blessed Virgin, connected with those presumed apparitions and messages, may be licitly practiced and encouraged.
3. Those who advertise through writings in order to propagate such events, or who organize pilgrimages or go to St. Damiano for devotional reasons are in blatant disobedience to the Church
There just isn't any gray area there.
Hartley- with shocking clarity- has staked out the position that he is free to simply disregard a ban from a Bishop- as in San Damiano or Medjugorje or even from the Vatican- as in Amsterdam or Garabandal.
He attempts to justify his formal heresy by openly lying about my position and slandering me. Let's close by addressing that.
Anti-Catholics like John Benko automatically pushes that if there is a negative decision or no decision that the visions are "condemned".
I am the one defending Catholicism and the official norms issued by the Vatican regarding the assessment of private Revelations. In the most recent instructions, the Vatican is clear that the local ordinary (Bishop) has jurisdiction unless that Bishop's decision is overturned by the Vatican. To defy the Bishop in this manner makes one ineligible to receive Communion until such defiance is abandoned and confessed. It is heretic Hartley that is the anti-Catholic here. He is siding with the demons! It must be noted that, in the entire history of the Catholic church, the Vatican has never overturned the negative judgement of a Bishop in an alleged Marian apparition. Not once. In this event, heretic Hartley is directly defying the Bishop. In regards to Garabandal and Amsterdam, he defies 5 Bishops in each. With regards to Medjugorje, he defies 23 Bishops of jurisdiction claiming that the non-binding opinions of Cardinal Ruini and Gabriel Amorth matter more.
Never once have I ever stated or implied that an un-approved event is the same as a condemned event. It is Hartley and Carpenter who are the ones pretending there is no difference. They act as if there is no such thing as a condemned event when there clearly is.
Hartley and Carpenter live in a demonic fantasy land with only two kinds of alleged apparitions-
Approved
Will be approved.
It is because of foolish imbeciles like these 2 clowns that our church is in such trouble. All that I asked of Deeper Truth was 2 things.
Do not promote condemned events.
Be factually accurate about all the others.
As you can see, Don Hartley and John Carpenter have sold their souls to the devil for the purpose of promoting their shows and selling their books.
