CathInfo.com

I have a copy of the book "Outside the Catholic Church there is Absolutely No Salvation" by Peter Dimond. Half of this book seems to be able to be found on http://www.onetruecatholicfaith.com, specifically on articles->[name of book] link.

http://www.onetruecatholicfaith.com/Roman-Catholic-Articles.php?id=442&title=Introduction&category=Outside+the+Catholic+Church+there+is+no+Salvation

As far as I know, this is the go-to anti-BOD/BOB/I.I. or Feeneyite book, so I thought it would be good to correct its errors, maybe page-for-page if necessary. I hope I can outsource this project to be done by users from CathInfo, but if I have to do it myself, I will. I would like to see other books similarly refuted so that there is total clarity on this issue. Find all the books, websites, articles, and claims, and then let's put it together. I'm pretty sad to see trad priests fail to definitively refute this problematic heresy, but not surprised.

I had created bodbob.wordpress.com collecting as much info as I had found at that time. I hope to combine this with all the links in this subforum and new links I've found and to create a new collection, as I've lost the login info for that site.

Here's a couple examples I found, I'm sure there are a bunch of these:
from page 82, or http://www.onetruecatholicfaith.com/Roman-Catholic-Articles.php?id=641&title=14.+Baptism+of+Blood+and+Baptism+of+Desire+-+Erroneous+Traditions+of+Man&category=Outside+the+Catholic+Church+there+is+no+Salvation&page=2

The section on St. Bernard. Dimond points out that Fr. Laisney (SSPX) distorted a passage by omitting that it was St. Bernard's opinion that BOD was Catholic. Dimond claims this as proof positive that BOD is a non-Catholic human opinion rather than fact. While I give rhetorical points to Mr. Dimond, it doesn't logically follow that because someone admits something could be false that it is false. Fr. Laisney should have kept that part of that passage in, and that's all that was really correctly pointed out here.

Just a little after this comment, Dimond then mentions that in writings on BOD there have been errors in other parts of these writings, and that therefore BOD is just another one of those errors. This also does not logically follow, though again is a useful rhetorical technique of "guilt by association" by Mr. Dimond.

Skipping to the St. Alban and His Converted Guard Section:
Dimond claims that St. Alban asked for water to baptize the guard, while St. Bede and Butler's Lives of Saints do not record that this is the case, but that St. Alban asked for the water to quench his thirst. This again, as far as I know, shows no proof for his case and against the opposing view, though I would again award rhetorical points because it is an interesting interpretation of the story to fit his argument.

Another thing from this section generally is that I'm not sure what definition Mr. Dimond uses for BOD/BOB/I.I. as he doesn't cite a catechism on the site/book. I bring this up because sometimes one can play games of claiming that a viewpoint encompasses some idea that it does not when things are left undefined. Or one can create a relation of interpretations that don't follow.

Let's take Invincible Ignorance for example. Dimond probably has a problem with how some supposed Catholics are content to not evangelize because they know some other people are invincibly ignorant and thus subject to God's Judgment as per what they know. I sympathize with Dimond's discontent at this practical effect of a failure to evangelize, by those who incorrectly reason that I.I. frees from the necessity of mission work. However, I don't believe that this shows that I.I. doesn't exist and that believing it is a heresy that destroys mission work, but only that Catholic leaders have failed to evangelize. By no means does I.I. give a disincentive towards evangelizing, because the Gospel itself says to make converts of all nations. It is only a distorted view of I.I. as freeing one from mission outreach which ought to be rightly criticized.

I imagine there's more like this if people would dig in to the writings.

Please add some refutations. Thanks all.

As far as I know, this is the go-to anti-BOD/BOB/I.I. or Feeneyite book

Well, then you don't know anything, and you got the wrong start since this is false. Therefore, your endeavor will undoubtedly be a most miserable failure because it will be born out of ignorance and bad will.

You may want to start familiarizing yourself with the true Feeneyite position first, which the Dimonds highly misrepresent. This must be your first step.

Here are some basic few books that first come to mind which you may want to read before publicly promulgating heretical errors about the position of Fr. Feeney:

Link to “The Bread of Life”:  http://store.catholicism.org/bread-of-life.html

Link to “The Gate of Heaven”:  http://store.catholicism.org/gate-of-heaven.html

Link to “The Loyolas and the Cabots”:  http://store.catholicism.org/the-loyolas-and-the-cabots.html

Apostolic Digest on EENS, by Michael Malone.
 

Thank you. Can you explain how these writings differ from Dimond's? Are they in conflict with each other?

You are posting about these matters publicly and you don't know this? Wow. You should read more about this issue.