top of page

The Truth about DEEPER TRUTH. Part 2, The truth about the Ruini report- what it is and what it says.

Let us be clear about my disagreements with John Carpenter and Donald Hartley.

They have be lying about 3 aspects of the Ruini report, falsely claiming:

  1. That it constitutes an approval, accepted by the Vatican. You can see from the CNA article above that that is false.

  2. That it is positive on the first year. Nope. 10 days. That's it.

  3. That it is silent on the remaining time, allowing for it to be approved later. Wrong again, the Ruini report specifically condemns everything after July 3rd, 1981

If the Pope approved the Ruini report today, He would be officially declaring that the Virgin Mary is not appearing in Medjugorje today and hasn't appeared there for more than 40 years.

All that I had asked for was for them to report the facts accurately even if our opinions disagree. We must be faithful to the facts and to the process and to the authority of the church. It was not an unreasonable request. What I got in return was a slap in the face.

I have no choice but to dissect and refute pretty much this entire audio segment because it is false and slanderous and demonstrates that Carpenter and Hartley are imprisoned in the Medjugorje cult in a way that is just unhealthy and injurious to the apostolate I founded and the faith I hold dear.

Patrick Coffin and Donal Foley put it best in saying the Medjugorje devotees act often like modern day Gnostics, convinced they possess "secret knowledge" not available to regular Catholics.

Coffin and Foley further suggest that these people are driven purely by emotion and are willing to disregard all truth to preserve this false notion that Mother Mary is appearing in Bosnia.

Sadly, Mr. Carpenter and Mr. Hartley have proven they fit this profile and act totally in the manner of this description of the Zealous Medjugorje devotee.

They are lying about the Ruini report both about what it is and what it says. It brings me great pain to make this accusation but I have no choice but to set the record straight. It is just so ironic that Carpenter decries the Medjugorje misinformation obscuring the truth and then, himself proceeds to enter into a torrent of misinformation.

The only way I know how to do this is to segment the above audio and respond to each segment with the facts. Of course, they will deny this and claim that their version of the facts is true.

All I can do is ask you to pay careful attention to the difference in our approach here.

They inform you what they claim the Ruini report is, says and does and expect you take their word for it. I'm going to quote you chapter and verse, proving I am giving you the accurate account, then I will actually link the report and beg you not to take my word for it.

Please, Read it yourself.


Carpenter posits that opposition to Medjugorje has resulted from the proliferation of social media disinformation over the last 10-20 years. He does not substantiate this claim with any facts.

10 years takes us back to 2012. 20 years takes us back to the year 2002.

Perhaps Carpenter can explain why:

  • All 4 of the condemnations of Medjugorje occurred between 11-15 years before 2002.

  • Before the 2002 explosion of negative social media, the apparitions had already gone on more than 20 years, unapproved.

  • He cannot quantify how the proliferation of anti-Medjugorje information has surpassed and negatively impacted the pro-Medjugorje side. In fact, The number of pilgrims rose dramatically in the time frame referenced. This suggests the explosion of Social media had a net-positive effect on promotion of the alleged events.

In his meticulously researched book Medjugorje Complete, author Donal Foley makes a compelling case that the truth is actually the exact opposite of what Carpenter claims. The avalanche of inaccurate positive Medjugorje social media has actually kept afloat a movement that should have fizzled out after the Bishop's declaration of 1991. The dramatic increases in tourism and the waves of cash rolling in seem to much more strongly favor Mr. Foley's view.

You may be skeptical but at least Mr. Foley offers an argument based on empirical evidence while Carpenter offers nothing more than unsupported conjecture.



The statement is absolutely false, as is easily demonstrated. Medjugorje has never been approved and likely never will be.

The Ruini report is not an approval and no reputable Catholic site anywhere in the world describes it as such.

Once again, I ask you not to take my word for it but search for yourself among the literally countless fine sources of official church documentation on approved apparitions. You will not find any talk about Medjugorje being approved, in whole or part, on any Catholic site of repute.

Go ahead and try.

It's not on the Vatican site, not on EWTN, not on Catholic Answers or, it's not on Church Pop or the Catholic channel or Ascension or Ave Maria Press or Ignatius Press or the Catholic News Agency. In fact, nowhere on this earth can you find a list of approved Marian Apparitions that has Medjugorje included.

Try to. I dare you. I'll eat my truck if you can find one.

Only a few fringe extremists like John Carpenter are making this ludicrous and easily-refuted claim.

The Ruini Commission report was a non-binding report of opinions that was submitted to the Pope and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for their consideration. It is of no more weight than any other opinion that has been rendered to date.

Don't take it from me, read for yourself from the Catholic News Agency.

I hope you are noticing a pattern. Carpenter tells you what is the truth but I show you. He can't do this because he isn't telling the truth, plain and simple.

Bluntly stated, the Ruini report has no more weight than the paper it is printed on until and only until it is formally adopted and approved by the Pope and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Period. Those are just the facts.

From Wikipedia, you can see currently that the Official position of the Church today is to uphold the 1991 condemnation of this false apparition.

The official position of the church is the same as it has been since 1991. The apparitions of Medjugorje are condemned. Period. FACT. Any attempt by John Carpenter to claim the events in Medjugorje are, at this time, anything but condemned is a bald-faced lie and he knows it.

The ban against promoting them or officially recognizing them is still in effect. The Ruini report changed nothing unless Pope Francis and the CDF accepts it. John Carpenter is just lying about this, straight up.

Right now, in promoting Medjugorje as true, Carpenter and Hartley are promoting an officially condemned private revelation.

Here is how we could have had a fair meeting of the minds. Carpenter and Hartley could still believe the Vatican will eventually overturn the ban and cease their unqualified promotion of the alleged events until such approval actually happens. That is what is known as acting in obedience and exercising prudential judgement.

Frankly, I believe Pope Francis and the CDF will approve the Ruini report right about the time they hold the Ice Capades in hell. However, if Carpenter and Hartley want to believe it will happen, I will smirk at their delusion and respectfully disagree.

There can be no respectful disagreement on a lie, however. What's objectively false is objectively false. Instead of proceeding under the correct process, Carpenter and Hartley have gone rogue and are openly promoting a deliberate falsehood.

Any claim that the Vatican has already approved even a fraction of this phenomenon is a straight-up lie.

Amazingly, Carpenter cannot even get the lies straight! He not only lies about what the Ruini report is, he lies about what it says!

The truth is that even the Ruini recommendation, itself, firmly rejects the notion that Mother Mary appeared after the first 7 alleged apparitions. That's a grand total of 10 days of events.

Carpenter claims the Ruini report accepts the first year which is something he simply made up out of thin air! You heard the lie, yourself in the above recording. Please re-listen and then bear in mind that the commission specifically rejects all apparitions from day 8 and forward. That's right. The commission did not defer on the last 39 years as Carpenter states. They voted on those apparitions and not one commission member voted in favor.

The vote I refer to is shown in section 2.5 on page 14.

Once again, the truth is the exact opposite of what Carpenter and Hartley say it is. Thus, even the Ruini commission admits that Mary is not appearing in Medjugorje today.


Ah, but the lies just roll on, getting more vile.


This lie is a whopper, folks.

It is like he is trying to out do himself with each successive lie.

First as usual, Carpenter provides no evidence that the Vatican took the investigation away from The Bishop (Either Zanic or Peric). He won't provide this evidence because it didn't happen.

Second, taking a ruling away from a Bishop, which Carpenter says happened only in the Medjugorje case is, exactly what happened in a case mentioned in my last article.

The most relevant facts are so important they bear repeating.

In 2002, the Bishop of Amsterdam Holland, Josef Punt attempted to declare the Amsterdam Apparitions Supernatural. The Vatican stepped in and overruled him and the CDF officially reiterated the multiple previous condemnations. It took this action in 2020.

So when Carpenter pretends to take the defense of the Vatican over the supposedly dissident Bishop, you must be aware of his duplicity. Though Hartley claims their show has never promoted a formally condemned event, you can see plainly that I have proven this claim to be false.

As to the specific charge of a case of the Vatican commandeering a Bishop's investigation into the events at Medjugorje, it is just another red-faced lie by Carpenter, no other way to say it. He cannot support this nonsense, he won't even try to.

The truth is that the progression of the examination of Medjugorje has pretty much gone by the book. According to the norms established in 1978 by the Vatican:

The regional or national Conference of Bishops can intervene:
a) If the Ordinary of the place, having done his part, turns to it to judge the matter with greater certainty; b) If the matter pertains to the national or regional level; always, however, with the prior consent of the Ordinary of the place.

The investigation was elevated to the Level of the Yugoslav Bishop's Conference, with the Vatican's assistance and the Bishop's consent and cooperation. That was Bishop Zanic. Of course, the Bishop's conference arrived at the same verdict as the Bishop: Non constat de supernaturalitate

Bishop Zanic's successor, Bishop Peric went further, declaring Constat de non supernaturalitate which is an unequivocal condemnation.

The Vatican's intervention followed the norms as well and had nothing to do with displeasure with the Bishop but with how the events in Medjugorje were growing to international impact. In fact, it was Bishop Peric who asked for the assistance, in keeping with the standard and he was involved throughout, also in keeping with the standard.

From Wikipedia....

On 17 March 2010, the Holy See announced that, at the request of the bishops of Bosnia Herzegovina, it had established a commission, headed by Cardinal Camillo Ruini, to examine the Medjugorje phenomenon.[10][11]

John Carpenter lied about the Vatican taking the investigation from the Bishop. It is just that simple. Source (Section 5, paragraph 4)

1. a) The intervention of the Sacred Congregation can be requested either by the Ordinary, after he has done his part, or by a qualified group of the faithful. In this second case, care must be taken that recourse to the Sacred Congregation not be motivated by suspect reasons (for example, in order to compel the Ordinary to modify his own legitimate decisions, to support some sectarian group, etc.).
b) It is up to the Sacred Congregation to intervene motu proprio in graver cases, especially if the matter affects the larger part of the Church, always after having consulted the Ordinary and even, if the situation requires, the Conference of Bishops.
2. It is up to the Sacred Congregation to judge and approve the Ordinary’s way of proceeding or, in so far as it be possible and fitting, to initiate a new examination of the matter, distinct from that undertaken by the Ordinary and carried out either by the Sacred Congregation itself or by a special Commission.

You might think that Carpenter would at least make his lies plausible. First, he provides absolutely no credible source for this ludicrous claim. Second, he fails to explain why Bishop Peric, supposedly stripped of his authority in this matter, would be allowed to remain the Bishop of this diocese- in good standing- until his voluntary retirement in September of 2020.


Hogwash. Utter garbage. In fact, this is pure calumny against a Bishop in good standing!

From an interview with Bishop Peric in the Diocese's own paper:

Bp. Peric:
Perhaps misinformation is another of Medjugorje's phenomena. But let us go back to Bishop Zanic. The whole thing had so caught his interest that he became involved in questioning the visionaries himself and closely followed the happenings in Medjugorje. What bishop wouldn't be delighted that the Blessed Virgin Mary would be appearing in his diocese? Especially Msgr. Zanic, a very Marian bishop, who as a priest and later as a bishop made eleven pilgrimages to various Marian shrines all over Europe: Lourdes, Fatima, Syracuse, etc. And then for the Gospa to have mercy on him and begin to "appear" in his own backyard as if to bring an end to all his wanderings all over Portugal!
But after a few months, when he heard the small fibs and large lies, insincerities, inexactitudes, and all sorts of fabricated stories from those who claimed that the Gospa was appearing to them, he became totally convinced that it was not a matter of supernatural apparitions of the Gospa. Then he started to bring out the truth and to expose the falsehoods. The greatest satisfaction of his ten years of hard work was when the bishops of Yugoslavia at their spring meeting at Zadar on April 10, 1991, dutifully declared: "On the basis of studies it cannot be affirmed that supernatural apparitions and revelations are occurring." This is an exceptionally clear ecclesiastical ruling, and is a rebuttal of the claims of all those who claim to have seen the Gospa everywhere and at any time since the year of 1981.

The Vatican stepped in because of the worldwide impact this was having and the pastoral needs of the faithful. Never, at any point, has any competent authority suggested that the Bishop had any improper bias or approach in any way. This is nothing but crackpot babble from the TRUE peanut gallery. Carpenter should be ashamed of himself for shamelessly calumniating a Bishop in order to sell books. Of course, Donald Hartley, not to be outdone in calumny, goes after the first Bishop, painting him as a dupe of the communists.

Of course, neither one of these guys can explain how the anti- Medjugorje forces managed to corrupt the Diocesan commission, the Yugoslav Bishops, the CDF and the Pope but I guess they are all in on the conspiracy too. The truth is that it is the flood of propaganda that has kept this farce alive, just like this farce


I can only hope Mr. Peanut did not actually read the Ruini report and is just speaking from absolute abject ignorance. Either way, any speck of credibility he may have had was just destroyed right here.

Donald Hartley unwisely boasted.....

The only thing you are siding with, Donnie, is the cliff you are pushing yourself over. Nothing you have said even resembles a coherent fact.

That makes this a good step off point to go right into what the Ruini report says and how it was received by the Pope and the CDF. At the end of the day, you will see that the report has basically no chance of being adopted. You will also see that Donald has no idea what the report says so his statement that he sides with it is ludicrous. Hartley believes Mary is appearing in Medjugorje now and the report eliminates that as a possibility. If the Ruini report gets approved, the first 7 apparitions are approved and all the rest are condemned.

The reality is that even the 7 are now not approved and will never be.

The Ruini commission report was made public in May of 2017. 5 years later, no action has been taken on the report by the Pope or the CDF.

That's right, Donald Hartley. You have been hoisted by your own petard.

By your claim that you side with the Ruini Commission, you are admitting that Mama Mary was not in Medjugorje when you went there in 1988 and 1989. Despite what Carpenter says, the report does not indicate acceptance of the first year but only the first 10 days. Despite what he says, it does not defer on the remaining 39 years, it condemns them without a single positive vote. You wont hear that truth from Mr. Peanut, but you can read it right from the words of the report itself!

The International Commission notes, in any case, that the events subsequent to the first seven apparitions constitute a real problem, which makes very difficult an evaluation in conformity to that which can be recognized in the original sign
From the original documents made available to the International Commission, it appears that the then adolescents had declared that the phenomenon would end. But as we know, this has not happened.
[ NOTE BY ME- This admission invalidates the first 7 events ]
Where does the impulse towards this very long successive continuity really come from? The question is reasonable, all the more if we consider that the places, conditions, times and relative predictability of the alleged appearances in progress have substantially changed: they now occur with predictable and often even organized rhythms. In the course of the various hearings, moreover, the International Commission perceived in many ways the great difference of narrative that exists between the original events and the current events. The alleged visionaries, in fact, appeared without emotions and took on an almost professional air in mentioning the phenomenon in progress;
when, on the other hand, in the transcripts of the 1981 interviews, the freshness and ingenuity of the children who try to report the lived experience during the first apparitions emerge–with indisputable evidence. These connotations, by contrast, give great credibility to the accounts of that time; but, at the same time, they show a noticeably changed attitude, not only on an emotional level, and in relation to a certain “addiction” to repetition, but, according to what appears, even in the public and spectacular forms of the present alleged visions or apparitions, among other things for the “ease” of their management. Considering that such difference in narrative (and credibility) cannot be ascribed to reasons of psychological disorder or even outright immorality—if not perhaps in the case of Ivan Dragicevic—the problem of the witnesses’ present credibility remains

Wow. The commission states the apparitions from the 8th one forward present a real problem.

That's putting it mildly.

Then, the commission admits that the "visionaries" all claimed that the "Gospa" said that the apparitions would end after 10 days and this prediction obviously didn't manifest itself.

Thus, the Ruini commission actually refutes it's own claim that the 1st 10 days were credible.

Then the commission admits that the visionaries seem to be emotionless and carrying an almost professional air and are addicted to repetition (acting?). Finally, the commission admits that at least one of the visionaries (Ivan) has no credibility. This same visionary is but one that the commission cites as addicted to money and their own well being.

Are you following? It seems our visionaries are enamored with money.

The report also cites the spiritual immaturity of the visionaries.

In fact, this might be the most incredible statement of all...

This is the worst bunch of convoluted nonsense I may have ever read. Bear in mind that you are about to read directly from the report, not from a commentary of it.

2.4 Present credibility of the alleged visionaries.
As for the present credibility of the alleged visionaries, it is first necessary to consider two arguments, widespread and repeated, which the International Commission, on the basis of its investigations, deemed it necessary to evaluate critically. The first concerns the immorality of the alleged witnesses, and in particular, their search for profit, openly considered by the CDF Norms as an assessment factor contrary to the truth of the certified private revelations. The second concerns the existence in the alleged visionaries of significant and altering psychological pathologies. But nothing of all this appeared from the specific expert reports conducted on them. (a) What the International Commission has been able to ascertain, in regard to the accusation of a possible seeking of profit, is that the witnesses of the supernatural sign originally addressed to them now effectively have a relation, ambiguous in certain aspects, with money (and with what in general can be called a preoccupation with their own “wellbeing”). Yet this ambiguity, rather than being located on the side of immorality, is found on the side of the structure of the person, often lacking a solid discernment and a coherent orientation, and also because an available and steady spiritual guide has been lacking to them in the course of these thirty years. If anything, there have been many signs exhibited of spiritual self-promotion and of a lack of pastoral relationships. In other words, it is fitting to recognize that, for long years, neither the bishops of Mostar-Duvno, nor the community of Franciscan friars of Medjugorje established relations with these persons of sufficient regularity and in-depth discernment of the meaning of the events which they claim and even now claim to experience. This circumstance has probably accented the current relative ‘impenetrability’ of the witnesses: innocent at times and calculated in others, through the protecting effect of repetitive formulas and stereotypes defending their Mariophanic “experience.” This lack of spiritual and human accompaniment is surely one among the causes of certain ambivalences and ambiguities that have been manifested among the protagonists of the phenomenon underway. This negative dynamic reaches its apex in the case of Ivan Dragičević, whose continuing meetings and conferences on the Medjugorje phenomenon seem to constitute his only work and support. He has also lied multiple times and is also less credible in the way he speaks of experiences with the Gospa.

So the commission doesn't deny that the visionaries are money grubbing, lying hucksters but claims that they just can't help it because of a lack of spiritual direction!


No Spiritual direction???????

The Mother of God has supposedly appeared to you 50,000 times?? How would you get better spiritual direction than that?

Finally, when charged with voting on the supernaturality of apparitions #8 and beyond, not one of the 20 persons voted in favor.

Think about that, folks. The very Ruini report that Donald Hartley sides with, not only doesn't defer on the last 40 years of apparitions, it rejects them- all of them! Thus, Donald Hartley admits- by his own words- that Mary is NOT appearing in Medjugorje now and hasn't for 40 years!

Let's look seriously as to what is being posited by the Ruini Commission because it would be plausible if the reverse was true. Let me break down the scenario...

6 Lying, manipulative greedy hucksters encounter the Mother of God who transforms their life so much- in just 10 days- that they become humble, devoutly religious obedient Catholics for the rest of their lives.

That scenario is plausible.

That is not the Ruini scenario. The Ruini scenario is that 6 kids were minding their own business when *POOF*, the Virgin Mother appears and, in just 10 days, turns them into lying, manipulative, greedy hucksters. You can't make this up! That is really the consequences of what the Ruini report puts forth. Mary turns sinners into saints, not saints into sinners! The "Lady of Medjugorje" is this lady!

Sidebar- The "minding our own business, tending sheep" defense unraveled and the kids later admitted (on the record) that they actually went up the proverbial hill to smoke and listen to rock music. It is credibly conjectured that they weren't smoking tobacco either.

Obviously, you wont hear this from Mr. Peanut.

Now, let's deal with Donald Hartley's other assertions:

  1. Despite Mr. Hartley's vicious claim that I have bad feelings toward Pope Fransis [sic], nothing could be further from the truth. I have been one of his most vocal defenders for his entire papacy. VERDICT: FALSE

  2. The Pope allows pilgrimages to Medjugorje. Yes, but the ban on public promotion of the apparitions as true remains in place. VERDICT: FALSE

  3. Bishop Hoser is dead. He (and his successor) were specifically sent to access only the pastoral needs of the parish. VERDICT: FALSE

  4. Gabrielle Amoroth was an exorcist, not an expert on apparitions. Exorcist Bishop Gemma (who I believe actually succeeded Amorth as Vatican exorcist) called it "a diabolical fraud motivated by the devil's dung" (money). VERDICT: FALSE

Everything here is by inference but Donald doesn't want to deal with the elephants in the room. I've brought them up a hundred times but he runs and runs and runs from them.

The reason he runs from them is because they are the checkmate questions.

Why, after 58 months, has the Vatican not accepted the results of the Ruini Commission?

Why, after 58 months, has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith not accepted the results of the Ruini Commission?

Why doesn't the Vatican, which has been examining Medjugorje for 12 years now, simply declare it approved?

More importantly, why is John Carpenter lying and sullying the name of Deeper Truth rather than defer to the church and it's providence?

You know very well why.

The truth is that the CDF slammed the Ruini report as biased in favor of the pro-Medjugorje side.

It criticized the obvious inconsistency of decrying immaturity and credibility issues of the visionaries but then flip-flopping to declare they were credible for a week and a half.

This is especially incongruous when examining that the one and only prediction of those first 10 days (about when they appearances would end) proved untrue.

The CDF actually advised the Pope Francis to reject the report entirely and immediately render a negative judgement on Medjugorje.

The Pope decided to study the matter further for now, while focusing on the "pastoral needs" of the diocese and the pilgrims. Nevertheless, he made his personal feeling known.'

He pledged to further study the first seven apparitions while making it clear he fully rejects all those after.

So, as a statistical fact, Pope Francis has already rejected 99.9% of the alleged apparitions at Medjugorje and the CDF has already rejected 100%. It is only a question of time before 100% rejection is the Vatican's official position. It's coming. The facts are too strong. One sloppily assembled report cannot prop up this collapsing castle built on sand.


bottom of page