Peter and Michael Dimond : the scandal must be ended before they receive the Eucharist at Holy Mass in Latin. (Graphics)

-Lionel Andrades

 NOVEMBER 30, 2018

Michael and Peter Dimond too attend Mass in scandal and I am not referring to their sedevacantismhttps://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/michael-and-peter-dimond-too-attend.html

Michael and Peter Dimond too attend Mass in scandal and I am not referring to their sedevacantism.

Michael and Peter Dimond of the Most Holy Famiy Monastery, USA,  too attend Mass in scandal and I am not referring to their sedevacantism.
 

They interpret the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as exceptions to the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). So they reject BOD,BOB and I.I.It would contradict the dogma EENS for them.

In their mind they have a concept of BOD,BOB and I.I as being known people saved outside the Church.They are visible and real non Catholics and not just hypothetical cases.

For me BOD, BOB and I.I are only hypothetical  cases and are not exceptions to EENS.I affirm EENS like Michael and Peter Dimond but our understanding of  BOD, BOB and I.Iis different.
 

For me they cannot be objective people. We cannot meet or see someone personally known with BOD,BOB and I.I.This is common sense.It is not a just personal view.It is something obvious for every one.Even a non Catholic would agree with me.

But BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions for the Most Holy Family Monastery and so are not hypothetical and theoretical. This is their reasoning whether they realize or not.

So see the doctrinal confusion they are in.

1. The Catechism of the Council of Trent when it mentions 'the desire theorof' contradicts the Catechism of Pope Pius X which says all need to be members of the Church for salvation.So the Council of Trent mentions an exception to all needing to be Catholics for salvation for Michael and Peter Dimond. It contradicts Pope Pius X.

2.Then the Catechism of Pope Pius X mentions invincible ignorance. This contradicts the Syllabus of Errors ( ecumenism of return) and the Council of Trent on no salvation outside the Church.Pius X would be mentioning exceptions for them.

3.Then the Catechism of Pius X and Trent would be contradicting the past ecclesiology and EENS as it was known to the missionaries and Magisterium in the 16th century.

I could give more examples.

The heresy arises as follows.

1.The Creeds( Athanasius, Apostles and Nicene) are interpreted with this error.

2.Vatican Council II is rejected because of this error in reasoning.

3.The Catechism of the Catholic Church is rejected because of this same irrational reasoning i.e references to invisible, theoretical cases are assumed to be objective and known people and that too, saved outside the Catholic Church, when in reality there are no such known people.

3. An ecumenism of return and the past ecclesiology based on outside the Church there is no salvation is rejected since BOD, BOB and I.I in the Catechisms etc are exceptions.

4.There is no traditional Mission theologically, since outside the Church there is salvation according to the Catechism of Trent, Pius X and John Paul II. So there is no call to conversion and membership to the Catholic Church, to avoid the fires of Hell.People are allegedly saved outside the Church.

5.There is no proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King, theologically, since outside the Church there is salvation according to the Catechisms, Vatican Council II etc.

So how can Michael and Peter Dimond go up to receive the Eucharist at Mass with this theological and doctrinal mess, they are in ?

To change the understanding of the Creed, theologically, is heresy.

To theologically interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS is heresy, at least, for me.

To misinterpret the Catechisms using a false premise and inference,is heresy. 

Of course they would go back into Tradition and affirm the traditional teachings on ecumenism and no salvation outside the Church but they still reject Magisterial documents. 

They do not affirm the past eccesiology of the Church, reject Vatican Council II and the Catechism(1994) is interpreted rationally.BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to the past ecclesiology for them.

To not interpret Vatican Council II and the Catechism(1994) rationally and in harmony with EENS for me is heresy.

With BOD,BOB and I.I being exceptions to EENS they create confusion on the Creeds.They do not choose to interpret the Creeds like me.This is not how the Magisterium interpreted the Creeds in the past centuries.

Then how can Pope Pius X and Pope Pius IX contradict each other? There is no contradiction for me.

How can the Catechism of Pope Pius X and Trent contradict each other? How can St. Thomas Aquinas contradict EENS and BOD and I.I? 

This is all a scandal.

So before they receive the Eucharist at Mass they could clarify the following.

ORTHODOX CLARIFICATION NEEDED

1.BOD,BOB and I.I refer to hypothetical cases and it is the same with LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22, AG 11( seeds of the Word) etc.All are hypothetical only in 2018.

a)  BOD, BOB and I.I are hypothetical and so they do not contradict EENS.

b) LG 8 etc are also hypothetical and so they do not contradict EENS.

So they could announce that they affirm Vatican Council II in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS.

2.Since BOD, BOB and I.I are hypothetical and not real people known in 2018 there is no change in the interpretation of the Nicene, Apostles and Athanasius Creed.

3.Since BOD, BOB and I.I are hypothetical the Catechisms do not contradict each other and neither do they contradict the Syllabus of Errors on EENS and an ecumenism of return.

Similarly Mystici Corporis, Quanta Cura etc do not contradict traditional EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.

St. Thomas Aquinas also does not contradict himself when he affirms the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and also mentions the man in the forest in ignorance or some  one saved with the desire for baptism only.On the baptism of desire, St. Thomas Aquinas is speculative and does not mention a particular, known person. This is something obvious.

Then the MHFM would be saying that they accept :-

1.EENS( without BOD,BOB and I.I being exceptions).

2.Creeds( without BOD, BOB and I.I being exceptions).

3.Vatican Council II ( with BOD/BOB/I.I and LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, not being exceptions).

4.Catechisms( which do not mention any exceptions to EENS).

On the negative side they will have rejected these Magisterial documents, where ever  they mistakenly assume BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS.

1.Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

2.Vatican Council II.

3.Catechism of the Catholic Church(1994).

4.Redemptoris Mission, Dominus Iesus.

5.Etc.

HYPOTHETICAL CASES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II ARE ONLY HYPOTHETICAL

It is important to note that even though Vatican Council II mentions hypothetical cases along with orthodox passages on salvation, which are mistaken to be exceptions by many, we can interpret these hypothetical cases as just being hypothetical.They cannot be anything else.They cannot be exceptions. Then there is no confusion and contradiction.

SECOND PART OF LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE HAS TO BE REJECTED

It is the same with the Catechism. Also the second part of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has to be rejected. It is from here that the error has come into Vatican Council II and then the rest of the Church.

Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were also  written using BOD, BOB and I.I as exceptions to EENS. Similarly the Balamand Declaration and the Joint Statement on Justification with the Lutherans were put together based on this same philosophical and theological error.

To change the meaning of the Creeds is a mortal sin of faith. It is a scandal.Now it is known to many people. There is no correction yet from Michael and Peter Dimond. The scandal must be ended before they receive the Eucharist at the Latin Mass. Otherwise it is sacrilege. 
 Sedevacantism based on Vatican Council II is now obsolete. The Council is traditional.
-Lionel Andrades

August 27, 2018

The Catechism of the Catholic Church and Vatican Council II(Feeneyite-without the premise) support the interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to Peter and Michael Dimond at the Most Holy Family Monastery, USA

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-catechism-of-catholic-church-and.html

La militante pro vita Gianna Jessen in Italia

La militante pro vita Gianna Jessen in Italia

Dagli amici di Pro Vita. La valorosa militante anti aborto Gianna

 Jessen, sopravvissuta ella stessa all'aborto e di cui MiL si è 

occupata QUI, in tour di conferenze in Italia

L

Cari amico, colgo l'occasione per ricordarti che tra pochi giorni,

 nella tua Regione, arriverà il tour di Gianna Jessen, simbolo prolife

 di fama internazionale, che insieme a Pro Vita porterà la sua 

testimonianza in diverse città... (vedi il programma sotto

 in quanto c'è una città in più!)...

Gianna Jessen è una testimone d’eccezione: da anni gira il

mondo e combatte per quei milioni di bimbi che non 

hanno la sua stessa forza: è sopravvissuta a un aborto salino. 

Ma il tentato aborto le ha comunque causato una paralisi che

ha dovuto sfidare durante tutta la sua vita.

Ascoltarla parlare e trasmettere tutta la sua gioia di vivere è 

un’esperienza straordinaria.

Gianna porterà la sua testimonianza nelle città di Pavia,

 Milano, Lucca, Reggio Emilia, Alessandria, Udine e 

Merano. Recentemente è stata inclusa anche la città di Varese.

 Ecco il programma del suo tour "La gioia di vivere":

- 30 novembre, a Pavia, Salone del Terzo Millenio c/o Casa 

del Giovane, Via Francesco Lomonaco, 43. Ore 20.45.

- 2 dicembre, a Varese, Aula Magna Scuola Mons. Manfredini, 

Via Merano (angolo via Dalmazia). Ore 18.00.

- 3 dicembre, a Milano, PIME, Via Mosè Bianchi, 94. Ore 20.45.

- 5 dicembre, a Lucca, Auditorium Oratorio di S. Anna “S.

 Giovanni Paolo II” , Via Fratelli Cervi. Ore 21.00.

- 7 dicembre, a Reggio Emilia, Chiesa Sacro Cuore, Via Mons.

 Gilberto Baroni, 1. Ore 21.00.

- 9 dicembre, ad Alessandria, Sala polifunzionale San Michele, 

Via Remotti, 43. Ore 20.45.

- 11 dicembre, a Udine, Auditorium Menossi, Via San Pietro, 60.

 Ore 20.30.

- 13 dicembre, a Merano, Sala Civica, Via Ottone Huber, 8.

 Ore 20.00.

Pro Vita accompagnerà Gianna e sarà presente per distribuire 

pubblicazioni, materiali e gadget.

Guarda il programma e scopri quale evento si svolge più vicino

 a te: ti aspettiamo insieme a Gianna!

Toni Brandi

Presidente ProVita Onlus

http://blog.messainlatino.it/2018/11/la-militante-pro-vita-gianna-jessen-in.html

Sedevacantist Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr.Anthony Cekada at the Most Holy Trinity Seminary, in Florida, USA offer Holy Mass in sacrilege

 Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr.Anthony Cekada at the Most Holy Trinity Seminary, the sedevacantist seminary in Florida, USA offer Holy Mass sacrilege.Like the present two popes they are rejecting the following doctrine.

1.Nicene Creed.

2.Athanasius Creed.

3.Apostles Creed.

4.Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

5.Vatican Council II.

6.Catechism of the Catholic Church.

7.Catechism of the Council of Trent and other Catechisms.

As I mentioned in a previous post,1 the popes and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) may say that the accept all these above doctrines/ Church documents.The  the two popes and Cardinal Ladaria and Archbishop Pozzo affirm all the above it could be wrongly said.

Then I would mention the following points to clarify their position.

1. Are you saying that they believe in one (known, personally seen) baptism for the forgiveness of sin mentioned in the  Nicene Creed ?
 It is only the baptism of water. There are not three or more known baptisms( desire, blood, invincible ignorance) which exclude the baptism of water for the forgiveness of sins?

Lionel: My answer would be there is only one known baptism.It is the baptism of water. There are not three known baptisms. We cannot see the baptism of desire, for example and neither can we give it to any one.So it us un-known.This is a mistake they make also at the Most Holy Trinity Seminary.

____________________

2. Are you saying outside the Church there is no salvation ( Athanasius Creed).? Their answer would be outside the Church there is salvation.

Lionel: My answer is outside the Church there is no salvation and this means outside the Church there is no known salvation.

This is a mistake also made by Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada. The baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) for them. They have had their religious formation under Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

_____________________

3.Does 'the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church' ( Apostles Creed) teach today that there is known  salvation outside the Church and that we can see and meet someone saved with the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I)? So the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) today is no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century ?

Lionel: BOD, BOB and I.I do not contradict the dogma EENS.The Holy Spirit does not teach error.
For the CDF the dogma EENS is contradicted by BOD,BOB and I.I. EENS is no more like it was for the Magisterium in the 16th century. It is the same at the sedevacantist seminary in Florida.The baptism of desire etc are exceptions to EENS.

_____________________

4.Does everyone need to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation ? ( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441,Catechism of Pope Pius X,Vatican Council II, Ad Gentes 7).

Lionel: My answer would be YES. There answer would also be Yes but at the same time they say that BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions and they criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney.

______________________

5.Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 846-Outside the Church no salvation) and (CCC 1257-The Necessity of Baptism) do not contradict the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS?

Lionel: No they do not contradict the dogma EENS. For the sedevacantists, who interpret BOD, BOB and I.I in the Catechism, irrationally, there is a rupture with Tradition.

______________________

6.The past Catechisms when they mentioned BOD, BOB and I.I were referring to hypothetical and not objective people, invisible and not visible non Catholics saved outside the Church.

Lionel: Yes they were referring to only hypothetical cases.The Catechism of Pope Pius X ( invincible ignorance) would be a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors ( ecumenism of return etc) for Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada.

______________________

7.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake when it assumed invisible casesof BOD, BOB and I.I were visible exceptions to EENS?

Lionel : Yes.

The sedevacantists too accept the false reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

_______________________

8.Fr.Leonard Feeney was teaching orthodoxy  on EENS and the Holy Office (CDF) wanted him to say that invisible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were visible exceptions to traditional EENS.This was heresy.

Lionel: Yes this was heresy.The sedevacantists criticize Fr. Leonard Feeney and support the Holy Office 1949.

________________________

9.Cardinal Ladaria made a mistake at the Placuet Deo Press Conference( March 1, 2018) when in response to a question from a lady journalist of the Associated Press, he suggested that Lumen Gentium 8 referred to known non Catholics, saved outside the Catholic Church.So the traditional teaching on EENS ; the Church having the superiority and exclusiveness in salvation was contradicted?

Lionel: Yes. He made a mistake.

None of the sedevacantists noticed this error since they interpret LG 8 and Vatican Council II with the same false reasoning.

_________________________

10.Pope Benedict made a mistake in March 2016 ( Avvenire) when he said that EENS was no  more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century, since Vatican Council II was a development?

Lionel : Yes he was wrong. Since he interpreted LG 8,  LG 16 etc, in Vatican Council II, irrationally.They were exceptions to EENS for him.In other words they were visible and known people saved outside the Church. 
We know there are no such people.

But the faculty and students and the sedevacantist seminary in Florida let Pope Benedict get away with this error. They were in ignorance.

__________________________

11.The BOD, BOB and I.I refer to invisible people in 2018. But the popes and ecclesiastics assume that these were personally known people saved outside the Church in 1965-2018.

Lionel:They refer to hypothetical and theoretical cases.So the popes and ecclesiastics made a mistake.

The seminary in Florida make the same mistake.

__________________________

12.Even if a St.Emerentiana or a St.Victor was allegedly saved outside the Church ( no one could have physically seen them saved without the baptism of water) they cannot be objective exceptions to EENS in 1965-2018?

Lionel: They cannot be objective exceptions to EENS since they do not exist in our reality.They are not here in the present times. A hypothetical,possibility of salvation is not an actual person saved outside the Church in the past times.People who are not there cannot be exceptions to EENS.

For Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada these are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.

_____________________________

13.If BOD,BOB and I.I referred to invisible and personally unknown people then they would not contradict EENS.So all the natives in the Americas before Columbus went there were oriented to Hell. Since the norm for salvation is faith and baptism and not invincible ignorance. Also any case of invincible ignorance would not be an exception to the norm in the Americas, since it would not be known to humans?

Lionel: They were all oriented to Hell with no known exceptions. Since the norm for salvation for all is faith and baptism in the Catholic Church.Invincible ignorance is not an exception.Since there are no known cases of invincible ignorance, to contradict the norm of the Church, taught by the Holy Spirit.

______________________________

14.Vatican Council II supports EENS when it says all need faith and baptism for salvation(AG 7).

Lionel: Yes.

The faculty and seminarians at Florida still do not know this.They interpret Vatican Council irrationally. 

____________________________

15.Vatican Council II indicates most people are oriented to Hell since they die without faith and baptism(AG 7).So there is the need for traditional mission projects knowing that there are no known exceptions to the ordinary means of salvation,which is faith and baptism.
Lionel: Yes. 

This has never been said by Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada and neither by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

_______________________________

My answers show that there  is no rupture between Vatican Council II  and the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS. Similarly the Catechisms are also interpreted with the hermeneutic of continuity.

This would not be true for the CDF. They reject EENS as it was known to the Jesuits in the 16th century.It is the same for the sedevacantist students and facultry.

I do not interpret the Creeds as contradicting themselves.This is an an error of the CDF.This is an error of Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada too.

For me the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 is irrational and heretical. However it is acceptable for the two popes and the CDF. It is accepted by the sedevacantists and traditionalists.

I affirm EENS like the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century.The present popes, cardinals and bishops do not do the same.Neither do they do so at the sedevacantist seminary in Florida, St.Gertrude the Great Catholic Church, Cincinati, Sisters of St. Thomas Aquinas,Queen of Hungary traditional catholic community in Budapest  etc. They say they are not Feeneyites.

So for me they are in public heresy.The popes, cardinals and bishops offer Holy Mass in sacrilege and so do Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada. In public they will not rationally affirm Magisterial documents of the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades

NOVEMBER 28, 2018

This is the doctrine the two popes reject : valid Holy Mass but in sacrilege

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/11/this-is-doctrine-two-popes-reject-valid.html

http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/home.html
https://www.sodalitiumpianum.com/the-st-peter-martyr-seminary/

http://www.sodalitium.biz/

JULY 2, 2018

Since for Ludwig Ott there are exceptions to EENS,the old Catechisms would also be a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology.It would contradict an ecumenism of return and no salvation outside the Church

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/07/since-for-ludwig-ott-there-are.html

JUNE 30, 2018

Bishops Schneider, Sanborn and Pivarunas contradict the Syllabus of Errors while the Catechisms of Trent and Pius X are a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church for them  https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/bishops-schneider-sanborn-and-pivarunas_30.html

JUNE 26, 2018

Similar to Latinist Ryan Grant, the sedevacantists Bishop Mark Pivarunas and Bishop Donald Sanborn interpret the Catechism of the Council of Trent and Pope Pius X as a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( Feeneyite) and the past exclusivist ecclesiology        https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/06/similar-to-latinist-ryan-gran.html

MARCH 15, 2018

Announcement and apology expected from Bishop Daniel Dolan, Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada  https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/03/announcement-and-apology-expected-from.html