Robert Sungenis and Peter and Michael Dimond : you can't have your cake and eat it too- yes you can!

Robert Sungenis would agree with Lumen Gentium 51.

51. This Sacred Council accepts with great devotion this venerable faith of our ancestors regarding this vital fellowship with our brethren who are in heavenly glory or who having died are still being purified; and it proposes again the decrees of the Second Council of Nicea,(20*) the Council of Florence (21*) and the Council of Trent.(22*) And at the same time, in conformity with our own pastoral interests, we urge all concerned, if any abuses, excesses or defects have crept in here or there, to do what is in their power to remove or correct them, and to restore all things to a fuller praise of Christ and of God. Let them therefore teach the faithful that the authentic cult of the saints consists not so much in the multiplying of external acts, but rather in the greater intensity of our love, whereby, for our own greater good and that of the whole Church, we seek from the saints "example in their way of life, fellowship in their communion, and aid by their intercession."(23*) On the other hand, let them teach the faithful that our communion with those in heaven, provided that it is understood in the fuller light of faith according to its genuine nature, in no way weakens, but conversely, more thoroughly enriches the latreutic worship we give to God the Father, through Christ, in the Spirit.(24*)

He would  also believe that there are exceptions to LG 51, the Council of Florence on extra ecclesiam nulla salus. You cannot have it both ways, for him.

For Robert Sungenis there are visible-to-us cases of people saved in invincible ignorance and implicit desire. These are exceptions to the Council of Florence, Cantate Domino 1441. Of course they would be if they are visible!.

He would say that he accepts the Council of Florence and also the irrationality of being able to see exceptions, which the Council of Florence does not mention in the text of Cantate Domino, extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

The sedevacantists Peter and Michael Dimond, of the Most Holy Family Monastery,N.Y,USA also accept the Council of Florence.However they reject implicit desire since they too, like Sungenis, assume that these cases are visible to us.They are visible exceptions to the Council of Florence on the defined dogma.

The Dimonds do not even accept implicit desire as a possibility. It does not exist for them.Since if these cases existed they would be physically visible for them and so be an exception to Cantate Domino.Sungenis accepts these cases,visible, and does not think there is a contradiction.

So both Robert Sungenis and Peter and Michael Dimond assume that these cases are not invisible but can be personally known for us, to be exceptions to the Council of Florence.

Peter and Michael Dimond reject implicit desire mentioned in the Council of Trent and think nothing about it.

Robert Sungenis and Peter and Michael Dimond do not realize that you can have your cake and also eat it too on this issue.

 

 

One can hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and also accept invisible-to-us implicit desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.

Similarly Catholic religous communities can proclaim the traditional interpretation of the thrice defined dogma (as it was known to Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston)  and also accept the possibility of a person being saved implicitly in invisible to us baptism of desire or invincible ignorance.No contradiction of the law of contradiction here.It does not have to be either this or that.

You can eat your cake and also have it too on this issue!
-Lionel Andrades