Sedevacantists house of cards toppled

The sedevacantists , Most Holy Family Monastery,USA had built apologetics and theology over an error, a factual error. Now that it has been exposed they will not admit it- that they were wrong all along. They wrongly called people heretics.

 

They are acting as if it is business as usual, selling their books and videos- in which they indicate that they can see the dead on earth, saved with the baptism of desire ! So they reject this baptism of desire and also criticize the saints who accepted it.

 

They say they are sedevacantists since St.Thomas Aquinas said that a pope in heresy must not be followed but they reject St. Thomas Aquinas when he refers to the man in the forest who can be saved . They criticize even St.Alphonus Ligouri for affirming the baptism of desire.

The MHFM are in a soup since they do not make a distinction between implicit for us and explicit for us baptism of desire. For them the baptism of desire is also explicit for us.

It's very difficult for them to admit  that they were wrong and that there are no known cases of the baptism of desire.They will not discuss this issue and act, as if they do not understand this concept.They are quick at producing videos but will not cover two points. They are:-

 

1) Is there any magisterial document which says that the baptism of desire is visible to us in the present times ?

2) Is there any magisterial document which says that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

I had a few years back also asked them two questions which they refused to answer. They were:

 

1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2013 ?  

2) Since we do not know any of these cases, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ?

  

If they answer the two questions obviously it would mean Vatican Council II does not contradict the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, as they express the dogma.This is a fundamental error in their apologetics and theology.

 

The Council is traditional on the issue of other religions and Christian communities.

 

It also means that the MHFM is using Cushingism instead of Feeneyism in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial texts. So it has to be a  break with Tradition for them.

  

So they can change their interpretation of the Council by not making the objective error of being able to see the dead person who are 'exceptions' to the dogma. We can accept the baptism of desire and also  extra ecclesiam nulla salus  and there is no contradiction.In a sense you can eat your cake and have it too. Implicit baptism of desire is compatible with the literal interpretation of the dogma extra eccleisam nulla salus.

 

 

They are correct in saying that the pope and the Vatican Curia are in error but this is because they are also making the same Cushing error as the MHFM.

 We see it just about every where , a whole edifice of theology has been built over a house of cards which must come crumbling down now that the truth is out.

  

It will require humility and continued prayers on their part to admit they overlooked something important.-Lionel Andrades