There are websites and blogs criticizing the Most Holy Family Monastery's Michael and Peter Dimond as not being true Benedictine monks.But how can they be Benedictine monks? They would have to interpret Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with an irrationality.
The bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska has criticized the MHFM but he interprets Vatican Council II with an irrationality and so there is a rupture with the dogma EENS, the Syllabus of Errors ( ecumenis of return etc).
Patrick Madrid, Jimmy Akins and Jim Likoudis criticize the MHFM but doctrinally they teach confusion like the present Chairman of the USCCB Doctrinal Committe, Bishop Kevin Likoudis.For them unknown cases of the baptism of desire are known exceptions to traditional EENS. Invisible cases of LG 8, LG 16 etc are physically visible exceptions to the dogma EENS.
So Michael and Peter Dimond have to interpret Lumen Gentium 8 as referring to known non Catholics saved outside the Church, as does Cardinal Ladaria sj, and then they could be recognised as Benedictine monks.
The Benedictine monks at Norcia all refuse to interpret Vatican Council II without an irrational premise and inference.They would be affirming Feeneyite EENS in harmony with EENS as it was known to the Magisterium and missionaries in the 16th century.This is not permitted by the present two popes.
They would be politically incorrect with the liberalism of the Left and so would be rejected by modernist Vatican.
They would be politically incorrect with the liberalism of the Left and so would be rejected by modernist Vatican.
So unless they accept the false new theology based on visible baptism of desire they cannot be Benedictine or any other monk.
Unless they accept Vatican Council II with the irrational premise(invisible non Catholics are visible) and inference( they are examples of salvation outside the Catholic Church), which creates a rupture with Tradition, they cannot be Benedictine monks.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
