For those raised in modern day Feeneyite Surroundings trusting your modern day "theologians" to have it right.  This has happened to all of us who grew up in the NO Church as well.  We grow firmly entrenched in error and and firmly believing our error is truth and there nothing and no one that will change it.  We need not look to the Benedict Center or the Dimond Brothers for truth or to interpret Church teaching for us.  In fact that is the last place we should look.  But we need to look to the Church herself and understand her teachings as she herself understands them.  Not like the Dimonds and other Feeneyites who accept some teachings but reject others like the Protestants who  trust their own interpretations more than that of cuмulative saints, doctors and Popes.  

Don't entrench yourself in heresy and then call everyone else heretics as the lay Dimonds do.

Vol. 7, HERESY, J. Wilhelm

Once heresy is in possession it tightens its grip by the thousand subtle and often unconscious influences which mould a man's life. A child is born in heretical surroundings: before it is able to think for itself its mind has been filled and fashioned by home, school, and church teachings, the authority of which it never doubted. When, at a riper age, doubts arise, the truth of Catholicism is seldom apprehended as it is. Innate prejudices, educational bias, historical distortions stand in the way and frequently make approach impossible. The state of conscience technically termed bona fides, good faith, is thus produced. It implies inculpable belief in error, a mistake morally unavoidable and therefore always excusable, sometimes even laudable. . .

I didn't thumb you down but want to ask:
What exactly is a "Feenyite"
Also I converted to the faith because of reading the dimond brothers website, that is where I learned lots of traditional Catholic teaching, the Holy Spirit thought me the rest, so not advertising the dimonds because I don't know if theyre heritics for sayin the pope is a heretic ( But he IS), but just sayin they're more in common with you than novus ordo protestants. So I would not say that it is the last place you should look, but not the first, first place is probably that tradition in action website, its excellent with lots of photos to make the point.

This is a very good exchange and you have valid points.  I think I bash the brothers more for their lack of charity than anything else.  I do not know if you know Father Martin Stepanich.  He was a priest since 1941 and recently died as the only traditional Priest with a doctorate in theology.  He had more knowledge in his pinky that the Dimonds have combined.  In a letter exchange with them he had the courtesy to call them "Brothers" they in turn referred to him as "Marty".  As soon as he died they, in effect gleefully danced on his tomb proclaiming him damned for eternity.  Somehow that does not gain my respect for the "brothers".  This is not an aberration but a norm for them.

That being said, you make valid points.  I too learned alot from them and they do have the truth on many things including SV.  They also put together good works that I recommend.  The sad thing about them, apart from their unmatchable lack of charity, is that they get in phone debates with people, including clergy and when they clearly have them on the ropes regarding SV, to where maybe the NO clergy would consider them correct or walk away with his tail between his legs, they start in with "you know that the Catholic Church teaches anyone not baptized with water goes to Hell right?"  Or something to that effect, thus any credibility they gain in the eyes of the potential convert goes out the window because they know that non-members of the Church can be saved by Baptism of Blood or Baptism of desire.  

You make a good point in saying they are not the last place you should look.  I have learned from them, both good and bad, truth and error.  But in a sense they are more dangerous than the Novus Ordo as they mix subtle lies in with much truth and the little lie can lead a long way off track.  On needs only start out slightly off his trajectory and if he travels a life time he ends up way off the mark.  The devil also tells lies with much truth and they ensnare good willed Catholics with traditional leanings with their lies, uncharitablness and heresy.  Raising minions of haters who think everyone is damned and that there is no Catholic Clergy left who do not hold heresy and that everyone is a liar, and not Catholic and going to Hell, some of these people post regularly on this site.  They are either thoroughly brainwashed or bad willed or both.  

You can't talk sense with them.  You might see a response from Ambrose to me on the hierarchy, that  is the way to debate and learn.  Arguing to the point and not the person.  But he seems to be the exception.  Responding to the words not calling people dirty rats when you disagree with them.  There is much low brow exchanges on this site and it is disheartening because this is where traditional Catholics supposedly gather and we have no excuse for making false accusations and berating others personally but that happens constantly on this site.  It is generally low brow and uncivil when debating doctrine.  A place where an objective new comer might look and have to hide his eyes from the hideousness.  The Bellarmine forums have a much more charitable and civil veneer.  You don't see the pettiness on that site that you see here.  

But you raise a decent objection without attacking me or even thumbing me down.  Unfortunately that seems to be the exception rather than the rule here, at least when it comes to discussions on controversial topics.  I have tried to point this out repeatedly but I have not seen improvement.  Maybe someone else can point it out and people will listen.  

I recently got in a debate with someone who addressed me under the guise of civility but showed clearly that he simply had an axe to grind and wanted to undermine any credibility I had.  Of course he did this anomalously.  But I gave him the benefit of the doubt because of his apparent cordialness and responded to all he had to say, which was basically that he "didn't like the inner workings of my mind".  When I pointed out that he is not discussing anything substantive but rather merely making accusations he responded with a heap of more accusations.  These type of discussions are the norm here on controversial topics. They are dimondesque as it were.

Perhaps you can pray that people on this forum gain a little charity and learn how to engage in a constructive conversation instead of engaging in all sorts of pettiness and calumny.  

The devil is very clever, and he uses truth to lure you in.  Truth mixed with error is like mixing water and oil.  

Hmm.. How am I supposed to find out what the subtle errors of the dimond brothers are?

And about baptism being necessary for salvation, the church used to say that unbaptized babies who die go to "Limbo" - it doesn't say this since Vatican 2. It also says in the bible that unless you be born of water you cannot enter the kingdom of God (or similar words). I just haven't spotted the errors you say are there so far, I watched most of their videos, but I also watch mainstream church supporters like the vortex, but I find truth only in tradition no matter where it comes from.

Lover of Truth,

Did not Our Lord himself said that baptism of water is needed for salvation?, how do you reconcile these words of Our Lord himself with the view that baptism of water is not needed?:

"“JESUS ANSWERED: AMEN, AMEN, I SAY TO THEE, UNLESS A MAN BE BORN AGAIN OF WATER AND THE HOLY GHOST, HE CANNOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF GOD.” (JOHN 3:5)"

This is a honest question, made in good will. Not open to harsh arguments.  

Lover of Truth,

Did not Our Lord himself said that baptism of water is needed for salvation?, how do you reconcile these words of Our Lord himself with the view that baptism of water is not needed?:

"“JESUS ANSWERED: AMEN, AMEN, I SAY TO THEE, UNLESS A MAN BE BORN AGAIN OF WATER AND THE HOLY GHOST, HE CANNOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF GOD.” (JOHN 3:5)"

This is a honest question, made in good will. Not open to harsh arguments.  

1. COUNCIL OF TRENT 1545-1563

Canons on the Sacraments in General (Canon 4):
“If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them (sine eis aut eorum voto), through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justiflcation; let him be anathema.”

Decree on Justification (Session 6, Chapter 4):
“In these words a description of the justification of a sinner is given as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the ‘adoption of the Sons’ (Rom. 8:15) of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior and this translation after the promulgation of the Gospel cannot be effected except through the layer of regeneration or a desire for it, (sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto) as it is written: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God’ (John 3:5).”

first place is probably that tradition in action website, its excellent with lots of photos to make the point.

That is a good website overall, except for their deadly errors concerning sedevacantism.

They are pertinacious and obstinate, seared individuals.

They care not for the truth. I still don't understand how these people are not sedevacantists. I don't get it!

The way they continue to docuмent all the filth and aberrations from these antichrists of the Novus Ordo, but still obstinately call them "Cardinals", "Bishop", "Father" and of course "Pope" is just sickening.

Absolutely, Mabel!   You are so right.

I selected the avatar of St Emerentiana for this forum.  She should be the patron of the Feenyites.
She was a young catechumen  in Rome and was raised  with St Agnes.  Her mother was wet nurse and nanny of St Agnes.
After St Agnes was martyered, she used to go to her tomb.

Here is a story of her from the web.

http://www.antiochian.org/node/17343

She was declared a saint by the church, as she was baptized with her blood, without ever receiving water baptism.
The church declared her a SAINT folks!

She is in the Roman breviary and the Roman martyrology for January 23rd!

What do the Diamonds say about her and many other martyrs who were not water baptized?  They say that they received water baptism some way before they died.  How rediculous is that!  Some of them were pagans who jumped into the arena, and announced their intention to die for Christ!   Do your research on these early martyrs!

TCAT:  you can find the errors of the Diamonds by reading what the church teaches, STAYING AWAY from their writings, and reading what  legitimate priests say about them and the Feenyite heresy.  After all, it was condemned by the church!  The Diamonds are very adept  in writing and speaking, as most heretical leaders are.