The Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM) still assume that the baptism of desire is physically visible to us on earth. For them the baptism of desire is an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This same error is being made by the traditionalists, liberals and other sedevacantists.
Peter and Michael Dimond cannot name any one in 2014 saved with the baptism of desire. Yet they will consider the baptism of desire as an objective-to-us exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.They accept the dogma and reject the baptism of desire ( explicit).
They cannot cite any text in Vatican Council II or the Catechism of the Catholic Church which says that the baptism of desire is physically visible to us or that it it is an exception to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
They will reject Vatican Council II since they assume that all salvation mentioned in the Council is ' seen in the flesh'. It would have to be seen in the flesh to be an exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.If something or someone does not exist in our reality it cannot be an exception.Yet it is an exception for so many Catholics.
The same errror is made by the Vatican Curia, the SSPX and the sedevacantists CMRI.The case of the visible to us baptism of desire!This is something they all have in common.
From the MHFM website: .E-Exchanges
Subject: Catechism of Trent and "Baptism of Desire" update
RE: Your updated version of the section of your Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation book, entitled: The Catechism of Trent and "Baptism of Desire"
First, let me congratulate you on the excellent research that had to have been done to produce such a meticulous and superb presentation. There is so much for one to consider within these (approximately 150) paragraphs. But I wish to say that I appreciate your dignified yet likeable, easy-to-follow manner of refutation, which always makes it a joy, and never a chore, to listen to or to read…
The points you selected from the Catechism as those specified to be taught to the faithful are noteworthy; and its (the Catechism's) repeated references to the Extraordinary Magisterium are also extremely noteworthy. I'm glad you discussed the matter of popes having recommend the Summa even after the Definition of the Immaculate Conception. This is important for the reasons you explained and clarified: it doesn't make the Summa somehow infallible (and how could it be when it contains such errors?). I would like to add that not only does the general approbation of popes not make the Summa infallible, but it also does not make the popes who have given the Summa a general approbation (often accompanied by glowing praises) heretics themselves, as some radical schismatics have falsely asserted; for as you said: "The papacy and the dogmas unerringly define the rule of Catholic faith. The rule of faith is not decided by theologians or fallible books. . . . Men can be mistaken and overlook things in a book, as the facts about the Summa Theologiae prove. . . . God allows errors to be taught by fallible men and in fallible sources because, as Scripture teaches, there must be false doctrines.
1 Cor. 11:19: “For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be manifest among you.”
You irrefutably proved your case that the arguments used by "baptism of desire" heretics, and others, which they cite from the Catechism of Trent, are "not even part of the official teaching of the Catechism to be passed along to the faithful".
To repeat your words: "If the obstinate proponents of “baptism of desire” believed in God, they would focus on what the Magisterium clearly teaches. They would adhere to what the infallibly-protected proclamations of God’s Church directly proclaim on the matter. . . If they had fidelity to papal teaching, they would then see that the Magisterium has never taught “baptism of desire”, or that anyone can be saved without the Catholic faith, or that anyone can be saved without actual membership in the Church. They would realize that while God protects every inch and paragraph of such proclamations, the same protection is not granted to every paragraph of the teaching of catechisms, theologians, etc. . . . The teachings of the Chair of St. Peter cannot be mistaken, and that protection was not granted to everyone.
My sincere thanks for your massive contributions to the eternal welfare of souls in this time of the Great Apostasy.
How applicable… is that passage from Luke 16: "If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither would they believe were one to rise from the dead." Protestants and false Christians like to believe that the sin which damned Dives was his unwillingness to assist a homeless and hungry man sleeping in Dives' driveway when, in fact, Dives could very well have been a philanthropist and pillar of his community from a worldly point of view. Surely there were such individuals then (as now) who were publicly known and esteemed for their largess. But as this important quote makes clear, the sin of Dives and his brothers was the sin against faith. The contrast between Dives and Lazarus was meant to remind the listener that worldly goods will avail nothing, and that the only true Good was the attainment of eternal life. This parable, therefore, was and is a warning not only to the Jews but applies every bit as much to the false traditionalists and other heretics who reject the dogmas of the Catholic Church. The true Popes, under the New Law, are the equivalent of Moses in the Old. For men to disregard God's Authorized Spokesmen was, and is, to reject the very authority of God Himself. In a way, it is even to pretend that God does not exist.
Thus, this parable should be a clear warning to all of how grave the rejection of Catholic dogma actually is. When heretics reject dogma, they are rejecting God, pure and simple. When Core and Dathan, the protestants/heretics of their day, attempted to disregard God's appointed leader and spokesman (preferring to create "doctrines" themselves), the earth opened up and Core and his followers were sucked down into Hell where they are now and will be forever. Long before them, it was the rejection of God's revealed dogmas by members of His first order of creatures which established Hell to begin with. And ultimately, and probably soon, it will be the almost total rejection of God's dogmas by mankind that will bring about the end of the world. It couldn't be simpler. When creatures reject the will and authority of God and refuse to obey Him, the consequences are immense and eternal.
The research/work which MHFM has done to demonstrate the infallible Catholic dogmas… is nothing short of astounding. This soul-saving information is available nowhere else today. Thus, what ingratitude and arrogance people have -- and what frauds they prove themselves to be -- when these so-called "Catholics" and "Christians" dismiss this historic and authentic Catholic scholarship out of hand and obstinately refuse to even examine it. Be assured that… we too daily contemplate (with horror) the breadth of the unpassable chasm between those who will to believe, and those who will not. Thank you MHFM.
Great Catholic teaching on BOD. I hope all Catholics read this material. Scripture teaches us to be holy as our heavenly Father is holy. But if we desire to be holy as the Father is, does that mean we are holy? We have to act and do God's will to be holy in the eyes of God. Being fulfilled in the desire to be holy doesn't cut it… And so it is with the desire for baptism, it doesn't measure up to actually being baptized… Satan disguises himself as the angel of light. BOD is just one of his demonic tricks that many fall into. Thank you for this heavenly work in these wicked times.