Michael and Peter Dimond must see hypothetical cases as just being hypothetical .Then they do not become exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and the Syllabus of Errors on EENS and ecumenism.Then they can announce that there are no exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II. The Council does not contradict the past ecclesiology or an ecumenism of return.

The Most Holy Family Monastery(MHFM) are  correct in their interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite) while the rest of the Church is wrong to accept EENS ( Cushingite).It is no surprise that  Michael and Peter Dimond  see the rest of the Church as being members of a false new church, after 1965.Their measuing rod for authenticity and orthodoxy is EENS (Feeneyite).

The popes from Paul VI interpreted EENS and Vatican Council II with a false premise. The interpretation is Cushingite. Cushingism causes a rupture with Tradition.When it is avoided the result is orthodoxy.

So there is a Cushingite and Feeneyite EENS and Vatican Council II.The Creeds and Catechisms can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.All papal documetns can be interpreted with Cushingim or Feeneyism.

The sedevcantists Congregatio Mariae Reginae Immaculatae (CMRI) whose Superior is Bishop Mark Pivaranus, also interprets EENS and Vatican Council II with Cushingism.

The sedevacantist community of Bishops Dolan and Sanborn in Florida, USA also interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with Cushingism. The popes from Paul VI to Francis have done the same and so no one corrects or advises the sedevacantists and traditionalists.

Michael and Peter Dimond were correct on EENS but they interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism.This is an error they can correct.They are not yet part of the Feeneyite Conciliar Church.They have to look at the Council with a different perspective.Vatican Council II must be accepted by the MHFM as not contradicting EENS.So there would be a new version of Vatican Council II, for them. It would be Vatican Council II which does not contradict their strict interpretation of EENS.It would mean they do not have to reject the baptism of desire(LG 14) or invincible ignorance(LG 16) and still be able to affirm the strict interpretation of EENS.

They must see hypothetical cases as just being hypothetical .Then they do not become exceptions to Feeneyite EENS and the Syllabus of Errors on EENS and ecumenism.Then they can announce that there are no exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II. The Council does not contradict the past ecclesiology or an ecumenism of return.

-Lionel Andrades