Pelosi Banned From “Communion”

There is a lot of truth in this video made by Brother Peter Dimond of the Most Holy Family Monastery, New York. I agree with many things which they say here but I also disagree with many things. For example, Peter and Michael Dimond interpret Vatican Council II, with the False Premise. It is the same with ‘the Vatican Council II sect’.

I have mentioned this before but I get no response. I am also not allowed to comment on their website and there is no dialogue between us.Though, I appreciate their work on EENS and Catholic Tradition.

I don’t see the need to go into sedevacantism like them, since Vatican Council II is not a break with Catholic ecclesiocentism for me,when I use the Rational Premise to interpret the Council.

I affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS like them. I also reject the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance as being practical exceptions for EENS, just like them.

But our understanding of BOD, BOB and I.I seems different.Since I do  accept BOD, BOB and I.I but only as being hypothetical cases. So I do not have to reject them. It is not BOD, BOB and I.I or EENS. I do not have to make the choice since BOD, BOB and I.I are not explicit for me.

For me they are always hypothetical and invisible cases in 2022. I would like to assume it is the same with the MHFM, but I do not know. Since there is a lot of confusion and there is no communication between us.

If BOD, BOB and I.I were hypothetical for them then LG 8, LG 14 (BOD), LG 16 (I.I), UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 would not be practical exceptions for their concept of EENS. So the Council would not be a rupture with Tradition.

Yet for Pope Francis and Brother Peter Dimond, Vatican Council II is a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors and the Athanasius Creed. So it means they are all interpreting LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc as being visible and objective cases in 2022. Only since they are physically visible in personal cases on earth this year, that they can be practical exceptions for EENS and the past exclusivist ecclesiology of , for example, the missionaries in the 16^th century.Invisible people cannot be objective exceptions for EENS etc.

There is no comment from the MHFM. 

-Lionel Andrades