Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Fr. Ramon Andreu's Notes: Part Two, Post 44




After a few months, Dr. Beitia renounced the seat of Santander, which was passed on to Dr. Puchol.


From the beginning of its entrance in the diocese, it is logical that the Commission was informed of the matter and of the criteria it needed to be a phenomenon of natural origin. Then its apparent end through the news of the second message occurred. Keep in mind that the announcement of the warning and the miracle are the fruits of Conchita’s locutions and they do not form part of the body of the messages that were transmitted.


It was like this that Bishop Puchol’s place was composed: A. The phenomena, for whatever reason, are not observed as supernatural by the Commission’s reports. B. As a result of the second message he knew that everything was finished, that there would be no more messages. C. They ignored the warning and the miracle because they were private announcements by Conchita. D. The girls in their mysterious amnesia declared that it seemed to them that all was false, but that they would not swear to something so extreme.


With these elements, Dr. Puchol constructed the following note:

“On August 30th, September 2nd, 7th, and 27th, and October 11th of 1966, we, accompanied by the Vicar General and the Advisor to the Bishop and the pastor of San Sebastián de Garabandal, and having petitioned those involved, made to the mentioned pastor, we proceded to take a declaration to Conchita González González, Mari Loli Mazón González, Jacinta González González, and María Cruz González Madrazo about the events that had occurred in San Sebastián de Garabandal after June 18, 1961. This resulted from the declarations of those involved:



1. That no apparition of the Most Holy Virgin had happened, nor one of St. Michael, nor of any other heavenly person. 2. That there had not been any message. 3. That all of the happenings in the said location have a natural explanation.


When the present Note was given, we could do no more than congratulate the clergy and the faithful of the diocese of Santander, that in the moment, with filial obedience they had followed the indications of the hierarchy. We lamented that this example had not been followed by other people who had worsened the confusion and the lack of confidence toward the hierarchy with their imprudent conduct. They impeded, with great social pressure, what had begun as an innocent child’s game, which had dispelled the very authors. Once, it is good to remember that the true messages of heaven come to us through the words of the Evangelists, the Popes, and the Councils and from the ordinary magisterium of the Church.”


In this Note, the Bishop is limited to repeating what the girls have said in their phase of amnesia, in their virtue, what occurred to have a natural explanation, when, in the complexity of the phenomena, a perfect demonstration escapes them.


In spite of the negative character of this Note, the situation stays in the air once again, because of Dr. Puchol. Without a doubt he did not see the process of the negations with sufficient clarity, and so he would not compromise the episcopal authority in order to definitively close the matter, limiting himself to inform, as he should do in conscience, of the turn that the events had taken. It is also notable that he makes an indubitable defense of the girls’ good faith, and does not have the most minimal reproach for them. This demonstrates to me that Dr. Puchol also continued with the same interrogations that his predecessors had, as it should be logically, until the date of the miracle had not passed, which was the touchstone that Providence had reserved so that the hierarchy could define it as such.