«By Bro. Peter Dimond ****NOTE: This article concerns our recent lawsuit with Eric Hoyle, which we won. All of his fraudulent, false and mortally ...»
Second, Hoyle admits that 1) he has no copies of this alleged document specifying that he will receive $750,000 upon departure; 2) he doesn’t believe Brother Michael Dimond signed it; and 3) he doesn’t recall for certain whether he [Hoyle] even signed it! There were over ten thousand documents exchanged in discovery as evidence in this case. Hoyle has produced many duplicate documents; yet, he does not have a copy of an alleged agreement that allegedly guarantees him $750,000. He also doesn’t even know if he or Brother Michael Dimond even signed this supposed document. He further doesn’t know if Brother Michael Dimond said anything about it. The reason Hoyle doesn’t have a copy of this document, and doesn’t know if he or Brother Michael Dimond signed it, or if Bro.
Michael said anything about it, is because no such document exists. In sum, his central claim about a document guaranteeing him $750,000 is false. His testimony contradicts his Complaint, which specified that such a document existed and was executed at the behest of Brother Michael Dimond.
His claim about a document guaranteeing him $750,000 also contradicts many other pieces of evidence that show he donated the money he transferred to MHFM.
A TOOL Of course, in light of the facts about his dishonesty and his apostasy, no true Catholic will consider him to have any credibility; but no one else should, either. For example, here’s a quote from the preliminary abjuration Hoyle composed while he roamed through the empty wastelands of radical
Preliminary Abjuration, “I, Eric Hoyle, reject, and condemn: 4. The falsehood that those who have professed heresy or adhered to non-Catholic churches, including members of the Vatican II sect and those involved in false traditionalism, should be presumed not guilty of heresy or schism.” As we see, he rejects the idea that any person in the Vatican II sect or who attends one of its churches should be presumed not guilty of heresy. He also identifies their churches as nonCatholic. During this period Hoyle also recorded a conversation he had with a radical schismatic. In the conversation Hoyle assured the person that in going after MHFM he would not make an argument that implied the Vatican II Benedictines are true. 7
But now, he declares and swears:
Eric Hoyle, formal response to Interrogatory: “… My own belief is that the publicly Catholic religious doctrine on certain matters, and that this undermines its Benedictine recognized Order of St. Benedict organization has in recent decades departed from authentic legitimacy. The lack of clarity in the word ‘undermines’ reflects my puzzlement at the time about how to describe the persons and monasteries that are now publicly recognized as the OSB. Now, after further consideration, I consider these to be legitimate members of the OSB….” We quote this again, after citing his preliminary abjuration, to illustrate the true depth of his hypocrisy and apostasy. Not only does Hoyle’s interrogatory response recognize the Vatican II apostates as “legitimate Benedictines,” but it necessarily, and by extension, acknowledges Benedict XVI to be the pope. For if all the Vatican II “Benedictines” are legitimate, then the “authority” under which they all currently place themselves, and with whom they all obstinately hold communion (Benedict XVI), is also legitimate.
If there was any doubt in anyone’s mind about why Eric Hoyle left our community, this act should obliterate it. His decision to leave our community, and relentlessly attack us after the fact, was not about fidelity to the faith. That fact was cemented when he completely denied his “faith,” and by extension the very issue over which he left MHFM, in the responses to interrogatories quoted. His decision to leave MHFM, and then become MHFM’s enemy, was also not about a person sincerely trying to do the right thing. It was about a man who succumbed to the influence of the Devil by accepting radical schism, completely lost his faith in the process, and subsequently became a supple instrument in the hands of the enemy of mankind. He became radical against MHFM when it when it suits the Devil’s desires for him to continue to oppose MHFM. It has become quite suited the Devil’s desires; now he has become a liberal, Vatican II sect-endorsing apostate clear to us that he is simply a tool.
Hoyle conversation, Bates No. 0001313.
Ephesians 6:12- “For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.” As I alluded to above, there is a divine irony, a poetic justice, in all of this. It is that Eric Hoyle’s decision to leave MHFM began with his false conclusion that our position on where people may receive sacraments and attend Mass is heretical and involves an acceptance or acknowledgment of Benedict XVI and the Vatican II sect. For, it is our carefully considered position, defended and explained on our website that – in this unique crisis, in accordance with canon law and past papal decrees on this issue, as well as the teaching of St. Thomas and Catholic sense – Catholics may receive sacraments from certain (not all) undeclared heretics who offer the traditional sacraments but accept Antipope Benedict XVI, if the person approaching the priest for the sacraments doesn’t agree with or support the priest, and if the priest in question is not so notorious about his heresy that it “can in no way be concealed or excused in law.” That is consistent with traditional Catholic teaching on this matter, as well as the principle that necessity makes licit that which is illicit (or rather, in necessity, one may do things he normally would not, as long as the faith is not denied).
For a full defense of our position on this matter, please consult our : "Sacraments from Undeclared Heretics" Debate - The Important Quotes [article] Sacraments from Undeclared Heretics - Debate [video]. This debate utterly refutes the position of the radical schismatics, and destroys the arguments advanced by people who think as Hoyle does on this issue. In this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYv0zhdV3vo, we also discuss and refute the false position of the radical schismatics, that the reception of Communion at any Mass where Benedict XVI is named as pope necessarily entails an acknowledgement of him as pope. Their conclusion in that regard is totally wrong.
By wrongly taking Satan’s bait to condemn an acceptable position as heretical and evil, and to falsely accuse people of holding communion with Antipope Benedict XVI when their position involves none, God allowed Eric Hoyle to fall into radical schism and file a lawsuit which wound up “Benedictine” Order is legitimate! In other words, the punishment for, and the end result of, his putting him in a position to profess that Antipope Benedict XVI, his sect, and its evil schism was that the very heretical position he feigned concern about, communion with the Counter Church, is exactly what he fell into. If you think this is just a coincidence --- well, you are wrong.
God frequently acts in this way. In Numbers 11, for example, the Israelites complained about not having flesh to eat. They declared: “Give us flesh that we may eat” (Numbers 11:13). Since this desire equated to a rejection of what God had provided, God declared that their punishment would
involve the very flesh they illicitly demanded:
Numbers 11:18-20, 33- “And thou shalt say to the people: Be ye sanctified: tomorrow you shall eat flesh: for I have heard you say: Who will give us flesh to eat? it was well with us in Egypt. That the Lord may give you flesh, and you may eat: Not for one day, nor two, your nostrils, and become loathsome to you, because you have cast off the Lord, who is nor five, nor ten, no nor for twenty. But even for a month of days, till it come out at in the midst of you, and have wept before him, saying: Why came we out of Egypt?... As yet the flesh was between their teeth, neither had that kind of meat failed: when behold the wrath of the Lord being provoked against the people, struck them with an exceeding great plague.” Since their offense involved desiring flesh to eat, God arranged it so that they would perish by that very flesh. Since Eric Hoyle committed schism by falsely accusing people of communion with the antipope, when in fact they held none, God allowed him to fall into apostasy and swear that the antipope’s religious order is the true one. 8
It’s also interesting that, in his apostate response to the interrogatory, Hoyle makes reference to a compliance affidavit he filed on 8/08/08. The bolded portion is where he makes reference to that affidavit.
Eric Hoyle, formal response to Interrogatory: “When I was under the influence of MHFM, I believed that one could lose his membership in the OSB by openly departing from the Catholic faith. I believed, and still believe, that such departure from the Catholic faith has generally occurred in the monasteries whose membership in the OSB dates back to the times before the Second Vatican Council and the New Mass. I have firmly resolved not to belie this religious belief in the course of the present lawsuit. To avoid any appearance of doing so, I said the following in my affidavit of August 8, 2008: 12. My own belief is that the publicly recognized Order of St. Benedict organization has in recent decades departed from authentic Catholic religious doctrine on certain matters, and that this undermines its Benedictine legitimacy.
The lack of clarity in the word “undermines” reflects my puzzlement at the time about how to describe the persons and monasteries that are now publicly recognized as the OSB. Now, after further consideration, I consider these to be legitimate members of the OSB in contradistinction to persons or groups who falsely claim to have been admitted into the OSB or who simply declare themselves Benedictine monks. The essential element to their legitimacy is their adherence to the procedures of the Order. This agrees with my reply to Interrogatory 22.” Just before he commits full-fledged apostasy by recognizing the Vatican II “Benedictines” as legitimate, he makes reference to a portion of his 8/08/08 affidavit. However, he leaves out an important part. The bolded portion below is the sentence Hoyle omitted.
Hoyle Compliance Affidavit, 8/08/08: “My own belief is that the publicly recognized Order of Saint Benedict organization has in recent decades departed from authentic Catholic religious doctrine on certain matters, and that this undermines its Benedictine legitimacy. I understand that the defendants share this belief, which they have stated publicly since before my entrance into Most Holy Family Monastery.” Why is this significant? It’s significant because it shows that Hoyle shared our belief on the Order of St. Benedict before and while he was here, and that we made our position on this matter publicly clear. (Anyone who is at all familiar with us knows this is true, of course, and the idea that we are not clear about where we stand is absurd.) He didn’t want to quote that sentence again, in his Since I referenced the Book of Numbers, it’s somewhat interesting to note that Eric’s radical schism, which led him into the depths of apostasy and unbelief, involved three people (himself, and two others with whom he spent time at the hotel after they left MHFM). Another schism, the Schism of Core, recorded in Numbers 16, was also led by three people (Core, Dathan and Abiron) – with Core being the leader.
response to the interrogatory, because he doesn’t want to emphasize (i.e., he desires to hide) the fact that he knew what he was joining. He desires to perpetuate the false impression that he was deceived about what he was joining.
In fact, Hoyle stalled and tried to avoid directly answering the interrogatory posed above (about which monasteries he considers Benedictine) for quite some time. He only did so when he was ordered to. This is a denial of faith in itself. If someone directly asks you a question about your faith – e.g., whether you believe the Vatican II “Benedictines” are legitimate monasteries and members of the Order of St. Benedict – and you avoid or dodge that question in order to perpetuate the false impression that you believe something different from what you truly believe, it is a denial of faith. This is just another example of his bad will, dishonesty and hypocrisy.
Despite Eric Hoyle’s best efforts to obfuscate his position on the Order of St. Benedict; despite his willingness to deny the faith and acknowledge Antipope Benedict XVI and his false order as legitimate for the purpose of winning a lawsuit and “taking down” MHFM, Hoyle still lost miserably.
In the process of this case, Hoyle’s devilish pride was also humbled. For after he left the monastery Hoyle boasted that he hoped to put MHFM “out of commission.” He also expected that, once he was done with us, MHFM would be bankrupt and unable to continue its apostolate. He exuded blind confidence and extreme arrogance in his initial communications with us and others after his departure. I recall one event in particular, on Jan. 8, 2008, a little more than a week after Hoyle’s departure. Hoyle returned to MHFM to get some things. He had two hired helpers with him, to assist him in moving. I began to speak with the two men about the Catholic faith, and I gave them a DVD.
As it turned out, the men were non-Catholics. As I was speaking to them, Hoyle arrogantly said that the men worked for him and that I don’t have his permission to speak to them. I immediately responded by saying: I don’t need your permission, and I continued to speak to them. Hoyle replied by mumbling words to the effect of: okay, I will add that to my complaints – the implication being that when he sues us he will also include a cause of action on this matter, and we will have to pay up for it. He was so vainly confident, so convinced, in his blindness, that he had the upper hand, as if we were going to account for all of his claims including talking to his workers against his will. How deceived he was indeed; but the Devil often gives his servants insufferable pride and a temporary confidence in their baseless positions. 9 It’s interesting that just a few days before the Jan. 8, 2008 meeting, we wrote a letter to Hoyle (dated approximately Jan. 6 2008) to warn him about the disgraceful activity he engaged in after departing MHFM. We told him that we were saddened by his decision, but that we’ve moved on and he should leave us alone. We added that if he should bring a legal action against us, “we will defeat your… case in court.” This turned out to be true. Not only did that imaginary claim about talking to his hired help never come to fruition, but all of his baseless claims were dismissed, just as they should have been. Hoyle sold his soul to win, and the God of Justice made sure that he lost, as the truth and facts of the case dictated.
There’s even more extremely revealing information about Eric Hoyle, which we will release in the near future if