by Mary Ann Kreitzer and Susan Matthiesen
Ever since Church Militant (CM) began their hotfoot pursuit to discredit the SSPX, they've used a witches brew of innuendo, supposition, assumptions, and loaded language to poison the public's perception of Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St Pius X. Their strategy includes putting witnesses front and center whose trustworthiness and credibility are seriously questionable. Jassy Jacas is one of those witnesses, but another whom cracker jack investigator Christine Niles said a year-and-a-half ago that she planned to interview is "Hannah," Jassy's BFF (Best Friend Forever).
|Picture of Hannah with BFF Jassy telling her how beautiful she is (lower right side)
Hannah, of course, is Hannah Merz, the "star pupil" of career counselor Rebecca Carroll. Hannah recently took down her blog, Desert Rose Life, which leads us to wonder whether an interview with Niles is in the works.
We've covered a lot of information in our series on Church Militant which you can review HERE. You can also read there about some of the "witnesses" Church Militant depends on, like Jassy Jacas and the self-identified witch whose brother either committed suicide or was murdered in a gang killing. The truth is pretty murky and lost in the fog of two decades of time, but CM, of course, presumes the worst, embracing whatever story is most damaging to the SSPX.
|Picture of Christine 30 years ago.
Is she suffering from mid-life crisis?
Meanwhile, back to Hannah Merz. Why did she delete her blog?
One possible reason: some of her weird posts cast serious doubt on her trustworthiness and credibility. If, in fact, Niles is getting ready for that year-and-a-half long promised interview, having Hannah delete the blog was prudent - a smart move from CM's standpoint. Did they suggest it? Seeing how tight Hannah and Jassy are could also damage Jassy's credibility. That wouldn't do at all since Christine has made her a centerpiece of the attack on Fr Duverger and the SSPX in general.
Despite Hannah removing her blog, we have all the content saved which affords plenty of evidence that she is (to say the least) not a trustworthy, credible, or reliable witness. There are no doubt more Spotlight attacks on the SSPX in the works and Hannah is a yet-to-be-used accuser with soulful eyes and many sad stories that even her sister says can't be trusted. Hannah's sister tweeted to Jassy:
You will get to know her better one day or another. She has burned many bridges with people who once fell prey to her manipulation. I'm sorry she has duped you too. I said that Hannah said she had allegations against Fr Duverger and she mentioned some weird things about what happened with one of her friends and him, but I'm not saying it's true. I shouldn't have mentioned her at all if I knew you were going to use her word, because of how she twists things and has so frequently. She is very conniving, and that's what is scary. Like I said, she might be telling the truth about Fr D but how are we to know for certain if she lies so much? She is not a reliable source for your case.
Interestingly, both Jassy and Hannah have stopped commenting on Facebook. Were they advised to give it a rest? Are they revealing too much? Are they too likely to damage their credibility? Or are they in Detroit getting coached for the interview?
So let's talk about Hannah's trustworthiness and credibility.
First, there's the (removed) blog post titled "Where It All Began". It's about Hannah's remembrance of being in her mother's womb:
"At one point in my life, I do not know when exactly… whether within time or without… all was warm, dark, as a void without colour, and I lay floating within a thick, slippery kind of fluid. I knew no words nor feelings. My life, as I knew it, was neither negative nor positive. I just… WAS.
From the womb she could hear her parents fighting. There was a "Little Brightness" in the womb with her that gave her hope, and a "Great Brightness" who opened her chest in the womb and touched her "tiny heart with the tip of one of Its great Fingers." The Great Brightness was very sad when looking at her, no doubt because of the terrible pain-filled future life she would lead. My! What a storyteller Hannah is!
Then there's the blog post, "Currently In 3 Relationships... and my fiancé knows" where she begins by denigrating her Catholic upbringing, telling various sins of her parents, then basically confessing her own sins while telling her audience how she loved being admired by a man she sinned with.
In "The Letter of a Lifetime", Hannah tells off her parents. She goes over the massive hurt and pain caused by their apparent abuse and severs all contact with them: "It will be the last time I reach out to you". She continues on to talk about victims of abuse, survivors of abuse and how her parents beat her "bare bottom with a splintering stick".
In "The Ending of a Book" Hannah offers a trigger warning at the beginning:
"Trigger warning: this content may contain references to physical, sexual, emotional and verbal abuse as well as miscarriage."
She then discloses the trauma and memories of the apparently evil things her apparently evil parents and others did to her and ends with the revelation of a miscarriage (Hannah has never been married):
"They were reaching out because THEY wanted an apology to make themselves feel better about what they did and said to me, and about what they neglected to do for and say to me. Well now, they will not have that satisfaction.
"I have nothing more to say to them. I am still working on forgiving them. But I have nothing to say to them. I am turning the page. This is the end of not only a chapter, but rather an entire book.
"I banish you from my mind, from my life, from my energy. I beg God for justice on those of you who hurt me. Especially you, who caused my miscarriage through your abuse.
"To my unborn baby angel, mama loves you. So very much. You are better off where you are now, than any life I could have given you here. I carry you with me in my heart, but I have to make room now too for the babies I will carry with the man who truly loves me."
In her "Why I Left Catholicism: Baptism", Hannah explains every old protestant heresy of infant baptism then posts a video of herself being re-baptized by a non-denominational preacher who explains to his audience that Hannah had been wrongly baptized by priests as an infant.
With full disdain and misunderstanding of the Catholic Church she writes:
They were told to convert, or else.
"For centuries, the Catholic Church has been a source for men to gain power and exert that power in the most unGodly ways, taking His most holy Name in vain by stating their actions and teachings are from and of Him. The crusaders, for example, massacred thousands, raped, pillaged, and plundered, all in the Name of God. They taught their children the ten commandments given to Moses by God Himself, and in the same breath, broke the third commandment in what can be considered – by human standards – the most horrific ways."
Her other recently removed blog posts contain more of the same: evil Catholicism, evil parents, evil men, other evil people perpetrating evil crimes of evil abuse against her making her a perpetual and sorrowful abuse victim while she is a beautiful, misunderstood, gallant survivor.
Hannah's FB videos show her dancing, exercising, singing - many singing videos - talking, reading from her women's Bible, cooking, putting on makeup, washing her face, showing off various hairstyles, more hair videos, modeling clothes and shoes, working, posing for selfies and other self-promoting pictures and videos. Are these what one needs in order to be taken as a trustworthy, credible and reliable witness? If CM is preparing Hannah as their next Spotlight witness against the SSPX, it's no wonder her most damaging social media content has been removed!
This one last video, "Brief Response to LifeSite News Article" shows Hannah telling the world how she will basically get even with the SSPX because of an article that was on LifeSite news. My thinking is that Christine Niles gave Hannah a year-and-a-half to make up a doozy of a false story against Fr Duverger and the SSPX. Hannah says:
"This is 23 minutes long. It is brief compared to the account I have yet to give. There is a brief mention of 'sex', so if you have children underage or not mature enough to hear even the mention, I do not recommend listening to it around them.
Well, Hannah, the reason children probably should not watch it is because you're practically naked in it.