Most "Holy" Family Monastery…A doctrine of Ambiguity, Condemnations and Haste

(A Letter by Mr. Patrick Walsh of Waterford City, Ireland - Fall 2007 A.D.)

"For in the last days the false prophets and the corruptors shall be multiplied, and the
sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall change to hate..."
-The Didache XVI, iii

Triumph of the Faith
Triumph of the Faith
(Placido Costanz, 1727)

"...this sacrament [Baptism] consisteth of an external element of water, and internal virtue of the Holy Spirit. ....Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it."
(Excerpts from the Annotations [*Official Commentary] on John 3:5, from the Roman Catholic Bible [Douay Rheims 1582 A.D. version])

Note: Click to view cover of the Official Douay Rheims 1582 A.D., Catholic Bible which (with its Annotations) carries Full Ecclesiastical Approbation

*Even the most simple-minded of Catholics knows that "to privately interpret the Bible" is not Catholic- but is Luther's "religion" [heretical Protestantism].

"Some, putting aside her [The Church's] true interpretation of Sacred Scripture, are blinded in mind by the father of lies. Wise in their own eyes, according to the ancient practice of heretics, they interpret these same Scriptures otherwise than the Holy Spirit demands, inspired only by their own sense of ambition, and for the sake of popular acclaim, as the Apostle declares. In fact, they twist and adulterate the Scriptures. As a result, according to Jerome, 'It is no longer the Gospel of Christ, but a man's, or what is worse, the devil's.'
(Condemning the Errors of Martin Luther [Exsurge Domine], Papal Bulla of Pope Leo X, June 15, 1520 )


Dear Brothers Peter and Michael, I am writing this letter as a matter of conscience, in order to address certain issues you have theoretically proposed pertaining to matters concerning the faith. Hopefully you will realise you have made a grave error in promoting doctrines that are not at all in keeping with Divine Revelation as proposed by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.


You may be acting out of sincerity, trying to stand up for the faith, however your efforts are misguided by your own interpretation of  Christian doctrine, which is a mistake I myself fell into when I proposed your material to others and believed you were infallibly correct.  Having studied the teaching of the Church in more detail I have come to a better understanding of my faith, knowing you to be in grievous error which I will endeavour to persuade you to listen to, and at the same time provide you with sound sense and crystal clear doctrine, which leaves no room for ambiguity. In light of my studies and in the most charitable sense I pray to God that the truth will unfold and the merciful God will open your eyes.


Brothers Peter and Michael, I sincerely hope you will not start our dialogue by calling me a heretic, but will instead accord me the same courtesy I will offer you by debating the subject matter at hand, remembering that virtue is patience, while the truth is being sought. It is not very prudent or Catholic for that matter to call someone a heretic when you yourselves are wrong, even if you don’t know it. These are all mistakes and can be undone with humility and Catholic teaching; however let us get to the issues at hand.


My first condemnation on your theory of Baptism of Desire lies in the fact that St. Augustine has already upheld this to be a fact and even gives an example of such by stating that if a person were to become a catechumen and had vowed to become a Catholic, he would be saved if some unforeseen event prevented him from doing so, and baptism would be supplied by desire. This is also upheld in the 1917 Code of Canon Law. 


Before I give you the evidence, I take this opportunity to make you aware of the paramount importance of the writings and teachings of the Doctors of the Church which are upheld in the decrees of the Magisterium. What the Doctors teach we are obliged to obey as they have been sanctioned by the Church. If not! ... there’s no point in having any Doctors at all. Nor can we pick and choose what is to our own liking, putting our own spin and interpretation on whatever we decide, period. Not everyone that says Lord, Lord is saved; unless they adhere to the Church and those who were given the power to edify the faithful.  Imagine meeting Our Lord when we die and having to confront Him with the issue of the ones He ordained to teach us the faith? How will God react do you think, when He asks us the question as to why we did not believe what the Holy Doctor Augustine has declared as the teaching of the Church on Baptism of Blood and Desire AND is listed into the annotations of 1582 version of the Douay Rheims by Holy Mother Church for our edification and Catholicity. You will probably say something totally ridiculous, like: “I didn’t believe him Lord, or I wasn’t sure, or I was standing up for the faith” or maybe another million concoctions!


Our Lord will surely say, “You foolish man! Did I not send you the Popes and Holy Doctors and Saints to teach and preach; what is the point of sending you teachers if you won’t believe? If you believed what they had told you, there would be no wrong in you, however since you have chosen your own doctrine, then you have also chosen your own fate, be-gone from me into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”


My dear brothers, here is the teaching of Augustine on Baptism of Desire in the 1582 version of the Douay Rheims, which you don’t have, to provide proper instruction on the teachings of the Church. This version is from the true original which was never properly introduced into the public forum because of persecutions to the Church at that time.  Its scriptural text and annotations are very clear and cannot be denied at the expense of being obstinate. The Holy Doctors (in this case St. Augustine) make it clear cut, giving no authority to any individual to manipulate his words.


If you purchase The Book of Destiny by Father Kramer (1955) you will find that in his thirty years study - his explanations of scripture are precisely in keeping with this version - which has been redeemed from a museum and carefully translated directly from St. Jerome.  It must be noted that not many individuals have this priceless gem. If you wish I will give you information that has come to light on the corrupt sources of the Challoner and Haydock versions which were imbued by protestant theology under Henry VIII and his dominions. The proofs of validity presented in these volumes present an opportunity for you to gain access and get closer to the truth, if that is what you really desire. It also presents an opportunity for you to face the difficulties which will arise from the fountain of knowledge that I present to you. Telling people that you have changed your stance in the light of such information would show you up in a good light.  People might view this as an act of inner strength and draw admiration instead of severe criticism and condemnation.


Below is the first piece of absolute proof which you must accept remembering that the Church has upheld the teachings of St. Augustine (Pope St. Hormisdassicut ration”i and Pope St. Gelasius in his decretal on the “Authority of the Fathers”)…. May God give you strength to make the right decision, keeping firmly in mind that it is an act of love and humility in honour of the Omnipotent God to tell people you made a mistake. Dear Brothers, I have made many mistakes - believing that God does not condemn us for our mistakes, however, what I do believe, is that He does condemn us for our obstinacy…. I pray you will look at the bigger picture and think of the great works you could achieve with the right application; I will pray sincerely that God will direct your hearts to make the right choice.



John 3:5



Baptism in water

necessary to salvation

















Gal. 5:6



Tit. 3:12


Annotations (1582 A.D. version of the Douay Rheims Bible)


Chapter 3

5. Born again of Water.] As no man can enter into this world nor have his life and being in the same, except he be born of his carnal parents: no more can a man enter into the life and state of grace which is in Christ, or attain to life everlasting, unless he be born and baptized of water and the Holy Ghost. Whereby we see first, this Sacrament to be called our regeneration or second birth, in respect of our natural and carnal which was before. Secondly, that this sacrament consisteth of an external element of water, and internal virtue of the Holy Spirit: Wherein it excelleth John's baptism, which had the external element, but not the spiritual grace. Thirdly, that no man can enter into the Kingdom of God, nor into the fellowship of Holy Church, without it.


Whereby the *Pelagians, and Calvinists be condemned, that promise life everlasting to young children that die without baptism, and all other that think only their faith to serve, or the external element of water superfluous or not necessary: our Saviour's words being plain and general.




Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it. Lastly, it is proved that this Sacrament giveth grace ex opere operator, that is, of the work itself (which all Protestants deny) because it so breedeth our spiritual life in God, as our carnal birth giveth the life of the world.


18. Is judged already.] He that believeth in Christ with faith which worketh by charity (as the Apostle speaketh) shall not be condemned at the later day nor at the hour of his death. But the Infidel, be he Jew, Pagan, or Heretic, is already (if he die in his incredulity) by his own profession and sentence condemned, and shall not come to judgment either particular or general, to be discussed according to his works of mercy done or omitted. In which sense St. Paul saith that the obstinate Heretic is condemned by his own judgment, preventing in himself, of his own free will, the sentence both of Christ and of the Church.


31. He that cometh from above.] As though he should say, No marvel that men resort to Christ so fast and make less account of me, for, his baptism and his preaching and his person are all from heaven immediately. He bringeth all from the very bosom, mouth and substance of God his Father. Whatsoever is in me, is but a little drop of his grace. His spirit and graces are above all measures or men’s gifts, even according to his Manhood: and all power temporal and spiritual, the kingdom and the Priesthood, and all sovereignty in heaven and earth are bestowed upon him as he is man also.





Aug. hares. 38  


















Baptism in two cases not necessary, but otherwise supplied.



Every Infidel and namely Heretics are judged already.


The Excellency of Christ's power and graces.



1917 Code of Canon Law …..Laws to be OBEYED by the Catholic Church





1267.  Unbaptised persons may not receive ecclesiastical burial, with the exception of catechumens who, through no fault of theirs, die without having received baptism, and are therefore to be regarded as among those baptised. Canon (1239)

Baptized in her own blood

St. Emerentiana: Approved Saint and Martyred Catechumen of the Catholic Church

Saint Emerentiana: Those familiar with the traditional Breviary (dropped from the Novus Ordo 'missals') will know the story of this virgin and martyr who Holy Mother Church has had Her religious commemorate on a yearly basis for some 1800 years. Let us quote the Breviary directly:

  Emerantiana, a Roman virgin, stepsister of the blessed Agnes, while still a catechumen, burning with faith and charity, when she vehemently rebuked idol-worshippers who were stealing from Christians, was stoned and struck down by the crowd which she had angered. Praying in her agony at the tomb of holy Agnes, baptized by her own blood which she poured forth unflinchingly for Christ, she gave up her soul to God.

Virgin and martyr, d. at Rome in the third century; The old Itineraries to the graves of the Roman martyrs, after giving the place of burial on the Via Nomentana of St. Agnes, speak of St. Emerentiana. Over the grave of St. Emerentiana a church was built which, according to the Itineraries, was near the church erected over the place of burial of St. Agnes, and somewhat farther from the city wall. In reality Emerentiana was interred in the coemeterium majus located in this vicinity not far from the coemeterium Agnetis. Armellini believed that he had found the original burial chamber of St. Emerentiana in the former coemeterium. According to the legend of St. Agnes, Emerentiana was her foster-sister. Some days after the burial of St. Agnes, Emerentiana, who was still a catechumen, went to the grave to pray, and while praying she was suddenly attacked by the pagans and killed with stones. Her feast is kept on 23 January. In the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" she is mentioned under 16 September, with the statement: In coemeterio maiore. She is represented with stones in her lap, also with a palm or lily.”



St. Thomas Aquinas….Approved Doctor of the Catholic Church

Q. Can the Baptism of blood, or the Baptism of desire, take the place of the Baptism of water?

A. Yes, the Baptism of blood, which is martyrdom and figures the Passion of our Blessed Lord, and the Baptism of desire, which consists in an act of the love of God through the action of the Holy Ghost, can both take the place of the Baptism of water; but in this sense, that the grace of Baptism can be obtained without the reception of the sacrament itself when this reception is impossible; but not in the sense that the character of the sacrament can be received apart from the sacrament itself (LXVI. n).

Pope Urban V……POPE of the Catholic Church ...Teaching authority to be obeyed by all - regarding the Angelic Doctor (St. Thomas Aquinas):  "We command you to follow the doctrine of St. Thomas as the Catholic doctrine, and study to embrace it with all your power." (Pope Urban V, letter to the Academy of Toulouse)


Pope St. Leo… Christ's VICAR of the Catholic Church:

Wherefore Pope Leo says (Epist. xvi): "Those who are threatened by death, sickness, siege, persecution, or shipwreck, should be baptized at any time." Yet if a man is forestalled by death, so as to have no time to receive the sacrament, while he awaits the season appointed by the Church, he is saved, yet "so as by fire," as stated above (2, ad)

Pope St. Leo the Great, A.D. 461

“Those whom the wicked king removed from this world were brought to heaven by Christ, and He conferred the dignity of martyrdom on those upon whom He had not yet bestowed the redemption of his blood.” (In Epiph, 1,3)



Pope St. Pius X
Pope Saint Pius X
"Defender of De Fide - Scourge of False Doctrine"

Pope St. Pius X's [Pope Approved] CATECHISM of the Catholic Church

17: Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?

A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.


Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 4: “In these words there is suggested a description of the justification of the impious, how there is a transition from that state in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of adoption as sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our saviour; indeed, this transition, once the gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place without the laver of regeneration or a desire for it, as it is written: Unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5).”277

Or a desire for it means exactly what it says, to infer differently is to twist the words of the Church and deny its teaching.

 You constantly quote Cantate Domino by Eugene IV to support your argument against baptism of blood without understanding its true meaning. The part of this dogmatic definition which you are stressing is the underlined “Even if they shed his blood in the name of Christ” as if to infallibly prove that is some element of truth in your fallible interpretation. However we will demonstrate that this is not Church Teaching and endeavour to raise your minds to a higher knowledge of the truth. Matters of the Faith need to be studied most diligently before any attempt is made to introduce them into the public domain. It is pretty obvious by close observation of your rigid interpretations and perceptions of Catholic doctrine that it is outside the scope of your learning and teaching authority.



Most Holy Family Monastery:Even if they shed his blood in the name of Christ


This piece of text has a complete different meaning and interpretation then that which you assume to give it.  The True meaning of this piece of text in Pope Eugene’s Bull is understood in the true sense, by the interpretation of the Holy Doctors. The meaning of this text; is that those who are baptised i.e. Protestants, and other false martyrs who believing, they are shedding their blood in the name of Christ are not saved. It has nothing to do with baptism of Blood. This has to do with those who are in the wrong faith who think they are shedding their blood for the name of Christ cannot be saved. Baptism of Blood pertains to those whom the merciful God bestows his grace in an instance of mercy to die for the true Church of Jesus Christ. Baptism of Blood can be attained by dying for the true Faith as Saint Augustine has already proved above in the 1582 Douay; however, I will give another example of the same once again from the 1582 Douay for your attention.



Here is the explanation of the Doctors on the Beatitudes of Matthew 5:10 

10. Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice: for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven.


10. For justice.] Heretics and other malefactors sometimes suffer willingly and stoutly: but they are not blessed, because they suffer not for justice. For (saith St. Augustine) they cannot suffer for justice, that have divided the Church, and, where sound faith or charity is not, there cannot be justice. Cont. ep. Parm. li. 1. c. 9., Ep. 10. Psal. 34. Conc. 3. And so by this scripture are excluded all false martyrs, as St. Augustine often declareth, and St. Cyprian de Unis. Eccl., nu. 8.

Dome of St. Robert Bellarmine Chapel
Glorious Saints Reigning in Heaven with Holy Trinity
Dome of St. Robert Bellarmine Chapel (Rome)





As we can clearly see, your understanding of Cantate Domino is flawed.  In various places in your magazines you have made attempts to discredit St. Augustine in relation to writing his book of corrections. If you didn’t, then why did you bring it up at all? St. Augustine, first among the Doctors in theology, corrected himself guided by the workings to the Holy Ghost; always keeping the Church as his focus. There is no need to proceed further. You have focused your attention on Augustine’s corrections deliberately, in an attempt to undermine his credibility, and elevate your own perspective, as if it were truth itself. This is especially true, because you can’t produce one piece of true Catholic evidence to show that these honourable Saints were condemned by the Church for holding fast to their beliefs on Baptism of Desire, instead you manufacture your own. Fact is, the evidence is provided by the Church, and proven to the contrary, that there is indeed a merciful God who is not bound by His own Will.



Most Holy Family Monastery:  Page 63 you state-

"Pope Eugene IV explicitly excludes from salvation even those who “shed blood for the name of Christ."



Pope Eugene IV does not explicitly exclude from salvation those who shed their blood for Christ by your interpretation, proving to you here that you have misinterpreted the meaning of a definition in a Dogmatic Bull; Why? Because your knowledge of the Catholic Faith is inadequate! That in itself is not a great difficulty. The real problem is that you are taking over the mantle of the Church in preaching the word of God, while not sufficiently knowing it, in so doing; you are undermining the Truth and spreading error. You are using Catholic teaching without a proper understanding of its meaning which has been given by God through the teaching apparatus of the Church  for our edification and salvation, and all you have to say is that this institution has erred consistently ….in your opinion.


Would you have us believe that several Holy Popes, a Dogmatic Council, many Doctors, Saints, Canon law, the Catechism, Testimonies to martyred Saints, and Holy Scripture are wrong to suit your illusionary ramblings, condemning all around you and blaspheming the Blood of the Saints? It’s no wonder Our Lord is retuning Enoch and Elias in the last days to preach the faith; for if your errors were equal to their truth then there would be no need to send them at all, unless of course there were  some article, act, or mannerisms of theirs which was displeasing to contend by Holy Family Monastery.


Here are some of the criticisms you have directed against the Doctors and Saints:


St. Cyprian erred


In another attempt in your magazine you try to discredit St. Cyprian.  You employ his belief that a heretic couldn’t baptise. You omit the following facts that he was supported by all eighty seven Bishops throughout Africa, plus the fact that St. Cyprian submitted his entire collection of letters in relation to this matter to Rome. He held his position too strongly and was severely censured for his position; St. Cyprian toed the line and died a Saint. You referenced St. Cyprian’s denial of the Baptism by heretics, as proof that he was wrong in relation to his support of baptism of desire; that’s like saying that if someone slipped on the pavement, no one should ever walk on the pavement again, or because Cain killed his brother, that the return of his son Enoch should be contended. This is a prejudiced viewpoint and is a common trait in all your arguments, using a situation which was resolved by the Church to cast doubt on other elements of Our Faith, even though it's not, it’s a kind of trickery to win over agreement.  You failed to mention St. Cyprian was severely censured, showing that the Church is not in the habit of missing important issues relating to the Faith. If Cyprian erred then it was the Church who found it out, we didn’t have to wait till now for the Dimonds to come along and compare error with truth. St. Cyprian’s error was corrected many years ago, while the truth of Baptism of Desire as taught by the majority of the Fathers still remains and was never condemned by the Church. You can quote No Salvation statements all day just like the protestant factions who quote one liners; however, these ex cathedra statements are useless unless you have a proper understanding of what they mean! These come in the form of writings of the Doctors and Saints, who you constantly ridicule, to you own condemnation. You should be acutely aware that the Church is not in the habit of elevating its Doctors and Saints to a state of error which she was never aware of so that Peter and Michael could come along with their new found doctrine and make everything perfect, keeping in mind that Our Lord said “My Dove My Precious one she is without spot or wrinkle” Not “My Benedictine Brothers, they are without spot or wrinkle”.

Judgement: Heaven or Hell
Every Catholic receives an immediate Particular Judgement when they die


Cyprian’s error had nothing to do with Baptism of Desire; instead you employ his circumstances in an unjust manner to prove that he could hold an erroneous doctrine because of previous or existing difficulties and thus maintaining that he was incorrect on Baptism of Desire. If we were to employ these same circumstances to the opposite effect it would demonstrate in a different manner that because of his aversion to anything that would taint the Sacrament of Baptism. For St. Cyprian to admit to Baptism of Desire and Blood, it would certainly indicate that he was aware of it, for how could St. Cyprian reject Baptism of Heretics and affirm Baptism without water (Baptism of Blood). The Church does not graft its faith in idle philosophies of alternate reasoning, no! She is grounded on the workings of the Holy Ghost as seen through the teachings of Mother Church. However, I refuse to subject myself to this mindset you have created, which is not in keeping with Christian standards.  Instead I simply believe that which he believed, and is supported by the Church as proven above.  


St.  Augustine erred


On page 50 you stated that St. Augustine wrote an entire book of corrections, as if to prove that because of this, he had somehow erred on Baptism of Desire, giving the impression that if he told the truth, we could condemn it because he made previous corrections to his writings. This is utter nonsense! It must be noted that St. Augustine corrected his errors in the course of his writings, guided by the Holy Spirit; not from the criticisms of two cousins [the Dimonds -ED] of one family eighteen hundred years later. It will be interesting to see if you have the ability or dignity to do likewise and correct your many errors, keeping firmly in mind that he was guided by the enlightenment of Mother Church and holds first place among the Doctors in Theology as stated in the Catholic Encyclopedia.


You asserted that St. Fulgentius, Augustine and a host of others, held that it was certain that infants who die without baptism descend into the fires of Hell, a position that was later condemned by Pope Pius VI. This Holy Pope anathematized the Pelagians, he did not condemn St. Augustine or any others as you have erroneously stated, if he did, show me the condemnation?


You theoretically proposed that St. Augustine was so outspoken in favour of this error that it became the common and basically unchallenged teaching for more than 500 years, according to The Catholic Encyclopedia.


Again, I reiterate that the Church has acknowledged the fruits of these theological perceptions by asserting Her supreme apostolic authority; making clear to all Her teachings by confirming Her doctrine, and removing any doubt. It does not however condemn any of the writings of Augustine or those Saints who agreed with him, no!  Instead it upholds his teachings regardless of your opinion.


What you are trying to do is to cast aspersions on good, by justifying your own opinions regarding a theological understanding, which has been preserved throughout the unity of the Church since the early Fathers. You are deliberately manipulating circumstances to win a debate. What you are proposing is, to look for an excuse not to believe those whom God has elevated for the needs of our salvation. You do this by seeking out a particular flaw in their teachings or otherwise, to prove your fallible theories; that is the rock you will perish on. If any of these Holy Saints were preaching heresy then the Catholic Church would never have elevated them to the status of Doctors and Saints…Do you understand? When we have a good look at what you yourselves have written and proposed in your false agenda, the sources by which you came to your idiocy, it should be clear to all with the simplest of understanding, that you are the ones who have misused the teachings of the Church and have demonstrated that you indeed are the fallible ones, and not the teaching institution of the Church. 



The Holy Face of Jesus

Act of Reparation for Blasphemy

May the most holy, most sacred most adorable, most mysterious and unutterable Name of God, be praised, blessed, loved, adored and glorified in heaven, and on earth by the Sacred Heart our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, in the most Holy Sacrament of the altar, and by all God's creatures. Amen. (Imprimatur: L.C. Epus Salford; 18 February, 1917.)

St. Bede (Church Father) and  Butlers Lives” are liars

Your Saint bashing did not stop there, you go on to pompously affirm that there is something untruthful about this piece of history, that it’s some kind of plot to fool the world. You quote the commentary on page 53. 


Most Holy Family Monastery: “Outside the Church” Page 53

The Butler lives of SaintsThey both record that just before the martyrdom of St. Alban and his guard, St. Alban prayed for “water” which he miraculously received! St. Bede then goes on to say that the guard died Unbaptised! Butler’s says that the water was merely to “refresh” Alban’s thirst!


In another rash statement that follows you blurt out: With all due respect to St. Bede and the good things in Butler’s, how obvious does it have to be?



Most Holy Family Monastery: “Outside the Church” Page 53

St. Bede: “As he reached the summit, holy Alban asked God to give him (Alban) water, and at once a perennial spring bubbled up at his feet…”



Fr. Butler: “The sudden conversion of the headsmen occasioned a delay in the execution. In the meantime the holy confessor (Alban), with the crowd, went up the hill… There Alban falling on his knees, at his prayer a fountain sprung up, with water whereof he refreshed his thirst… Together with St. Alban, the soldier, who had refused to imbrue (stain) his hands in his blood, and had declared himself a Christian, was also beheaded, being baptized in his own blood.”


The testimony of this Holy Saint and Church Father should be good enough for you to accept; instead you have chosen to use this information by the Butlers, written possibly not in the way that would have done justice to the honesty of St. Bede’s account. However St. Bede’s testimony should be good enough for any upstanding Catholic to accept, With the exception of yourselves who seem to have the knack of finding fault with almost everything that is Catholic; You use these situations to cast doubt on the Testimony of another saint of Our Holy Church. The way that your finding fault renders it most unlikely that you’ll ever see the truth outside the confines of your own tunnel vision; not forgetting that you have in addition questioned the credibility of the renowned author, Father Alban Butler; (1710 -1763) This edition on lives of the Saints is regarded as the most revered Catholic book after the Bible, the missal and imitations of Christ. Let’s pause here to give an examination of your sources which you constantly reference. These Un-Catholic sources give an indication as to your faith building techniques. You maintain that the Doctors are just fallible human beings in many of your abominable pages, forgetting that this is not so when they teach the faith. When the Pope speaks from the chair of Peter on faith and morals he is speaking infallibly or if he is upholding an already infallibly proclaimed dogma, tradition or teaching, this is called infallibility. When the teachers of the Church preach and teach its doctrine this is called active infallibility. I would be very careful on how you critique the Holy Doctors and Saints, a good Catholic will do it with holiness, reverence and respect, not by insulting their ministry, which is an even greater insult to God.


Most Unholy Family Monastery Protestant Sources


Challoner Bible


New Jerusalem Bible

Rock and Roll sorcerers




Attwater Catholic Dictionary


Challoners Bible:

The revisions of the Rheims Bible made by Bishop Challoner, [N.T 1749, 1750, 1752: O.P. 1750]   The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1909 A.D. states: "Although the Bibles in use at the present day by the Catholics of England and Ireland are popularly styled the Douay Version, they are most improperly so called; they are founded, with more or less alteration, on a series of revisions undertaken by Bishop Challoner in 1749-52 . . .

The changes introduced by him were so considerable that, Cardinal Wiseman wrote, '“To call it any longer the Douay or Rheimish version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified until scarce a verse remains as it was originally printed." Never the less this is what commonly passes as the Douay Bible and is the version used by English Catholics. Challoners alterations mostly took the form of approximations to the text of the Protestant King James "Version" and the clearing up of obscure words and passages in the true Douay Version.

The "Haydock Douay-Rheims Bible"


The other supposed "Douay-Rheims" Bible being widely sold today is the Haydock Bible. Unfortunately it is another Challoner variation.


The 1909 Catholic Encyclopedia under the subject "Haydock, George Leo" has this to say concerning the "Haydock Bible" now being erroneously sold as the Douay-Rheims:


Father Haydock's chief publication was a new edition of the English translation of the Latin Vulgate first published at Rheims in 1582, and at Douay in 1609; Bishop Challoner's text of 1750 was the basis of the work, but in the “New Testament” Dr. Troy's edition of 1794 is largely followed. The notes are partly original, partly selected from other writers, those on the New Testament not having been compiled by Father Haydock. The edition appeared in Manchester, 1812-14; Dublin, 1812-13; Edinburgh and Dublin, 1845-8; New York, 1852-6. So, to recapitulate, we see that Father Haydock's version is NOT the Douay-Rheims is not only the Challoner version, but the New Testament is largely the Troy version of 1794, and, the notes for the New Testament are NOT his notes.


[T]he respective publishers, were printers; but the editor and annotator employed by the former was his own brother, who was a priest, the Rev. George Haydock, to whom the edition owes its celebrity."

--- The "Troy Version" used by Fr. Haydock ---


The question remains now -What is the Troy version that most have not heard of?


A. Another Challoner variation: it was a 1805, version (published in the U.S.) that was based on the Dublin "fifth edition" of Challoner, having been slightly revised by Dr. Troy of Dublin.

Thus, the Haydock Bible is NOT the Real Douay Rheims Bible.


To finish with the information on the Challoner Version, please recall Cardinal Wiseman's statement:

"In nearly every case Challoner's changes took the form of approximating to the Authorized Version [King James]. . .”


New Jerusalem Bible


Press release from the "Catholic" Communications Network issued on November 21st 2005

Lecture by Fr. Henry Wansborough at the Gift of Scripture Launch




Fr. Henry Wansborough (with "Cardinal" Levada) meets "Pope" Benedict xvi 2007

He is the author of the New Jerusalem Bible

Advent: Saturday 15 Fr. Henry Wansborough of Ampleforth at Robin Hoods Bay Methodist "Church". Talk, questions and refreshments -EVERYONE Welcome.

His [the V2 Sect Heretic's Wansborough's] Speech:


"…First I would say that it is a highly Catholic document. It is built on and really grows out of authoritative Catholic teaching at four levels. These authorities are not merely frequently quoted, but do genuinely inform the thinking.


1. The full Magisterium of the Church in the form of the Council decree on Revelation and Papal Encyclicals.


2. Documents of the Pontifical Biblical Commission on the historical truth of the gospels, on the interpretation of the Bible and 27 quotations from the latest document on the Jewish people and their sacred scriptures in the Christian Bible.


3. Two addresses of "Pope" John Paul II.


4. The Catechism of the Catholic Church. ????? (You’ll forgive me if I put in the question marks)

This is a comprehensive range of Catholic documentation, authoritative, academic and pastoral, and the thought of the document genuinely grows out of them. But the document is also Catholic in another most important sense, ecumenical. From the beginning of the concept of this teaching document ecumenical representatives have been closely involved, and the agreed statements between Catholics and Anglicans and between Catholics and Methodists are quoted from the first few paragraphs.


One of the joys of biblical study has been that confessional boundaries play little part, and it is especially good to see this put into practice in an official teaching document of the Church. Particularly encouraging is the handsome admission of the debt to Christian scholars of other traditions than Catholic, and to Jewish scholars,


The document is also comprehensive in that it ranges widely over the history of the Church. To begin with, the first Papal quotation is from "Pope" John Paul's allocution Ecclesia in Europa…"


Rock and Roll sorcerers (video)


Another way which you transmit the message of Christ?... is by the sale of a *Protestant video which is full of immorality and false scriptural reading; an obnoxious compilation which no Catholic should ever cast their eyes upon. The Danger with this  video is that it could lead the faithful or any unsuspecting individual to a premise that there is some element of truth to be gained in the understanding of a “protestant viewpoint”, solely because of its power to put together a rock video while profanely applying a false sense of scripture to its meaning. There is NOTHING to be gained by the application of rock "music" to a false version of scripture, or by the carnal sinful antics of a certain female singer who purposely publically blasphemes God's Spotless Mother in her pervert songs and actions. By supporting such organizations we only help them to thrive and promote their false church through uncharitable methods. Would Mother Church in her glory distribute such evil as a means of teaching the faithful? If you don’t know the answer to this question, then you are lacking the most basic understanding of Catholic doctrine: The answer is of course NO! She would NEVER have distributed such filth; notwithstanding your own personal authority to override her delegated power, and in the process making a mockery of the teaching of this great institution which you claim to defend. The Catholic Church has every means to edify any individual through its teaching…shame on you! Protestants and the like have been given to understand the material things of this world, without true knowledge of Gods Word. When you promote their profane concepts you embrace their ideology…shame on you! Take the block out of your eye!

*"Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin... containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful... in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish or defend them. They will incur these penalties if they presume to uphold them in any way, personally or through another or others, directly or indirectly, tacitly or explicitly, publicly or occultly, either in their own homes or in other public or private places."
-His Holiness, Pope Leo X, Exsurge Domine (Condemning the Errors of Martin Luther) Papal Bulla, May 16, 1520

True Catholic Sources

11. Does the Vulgate have the Church's special approval?


The Council of Trent (Italy) in 1546 declared it to be the only authentic and official version for the Latin Rite: "The same Sacred and Holy Synod ... hereby declares and enacts that the same well-known Old Latin Vulgate edition ... is to be held authentic in public readings, disputations, sermons, and expositions, and that no one shall dare or presume to reject it under any pretence whatsoever." (DZ. 785). It is still the official Catholic Bible today.


Imperative Text from the Catholic Bible (2 Peter 1:20-21)

2 Peter 1:20-21

20. Understanding this first that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.


21. For, not by mans will was prophecy brought at any time: But the holy men of God speak, inspired with the Holy Ghost.

Most Holy Family Monastery: A Voice Crying in the Wilderness Issue #2:


You quote 1 Machabees 1:57 and 1:62 to confirm that the abomination of desolation is an object: a 2nd altar which was erected upon and over against the altar of God.  You state that upon and over against are adjectives to describe a 2nd alter which is in proximity to the true altar. You state that over and against are scriptural ways of describing two objects being in proximity to each other….What a load of nonsense! There is no such reference to anything of the sort except your own made up version. You quote Bishop Challoner to prove your assumptions which he says come direct from Saint Jerome. (See above)


It may surprise you to know that I have the version of Jerome’s translations 1582 and there is no mention of over and against.


Macabees 1:57 1582 Douay

57. The fifteenth day of the month Casleu, the hundredth five and fortieth year king Antiochus (l) built the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God, and through out all the cities of Judah round about they builded altars:


Macabees 1:62 1582 Douay

62. And the five and twentieth day of the month they sacrificed upon the altar that was against the altar.   


There is no mention of the word over here to indicate the proximity of a thing as you call it. It is a clear reference to against the altar”. The meaning of the words against the altar here in Macabees 1:62 are understood to be, that a false offering was made which is against or in opposition to the true sacrifice. Macabees 1:57 refers to a false idol while Macabees 1:62 refers to a false sacrifice.  It is not  a physical thing as such. The false idol is a profanation of Gods Church by which the holy sacrifice is taken away. The abomination of desolation is properly called the taking away of the Sacrifice of the Mass. You then make a most inappropriate decision and reference Bishops Challoner’s Douay Rheims bible, as if it was the bee’s knees of theology, which you insist is used by most English Catholics, not being aware that Attwater had condemned the same version as being totally corrupted by the errors of Protestantism. (See above)


Dear Peter & Michael, you go on to quote the Jerusalem bible and the text of Daniel 9:27 the abomination of desolation will be on a wing of a temple. There is no mention of a wing in the St Jerome version of 1582. However! If it were there, it would not have the uncatholic interpretation you have assigned it. The council of Trent stated that the Douay 1582 is the only true version. Here below is the *correct translation!


*Daniel 9:27 1582 Douay

27.  And he will confirm the covenant to many, one week: and in the half of the week shall the host and the sacrifice fail: and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation: and even to the consummation and to the end shall the desolation endure...


Most Holy Family Monastery: Issue #4 Page 2

Understanding that the "waters" of the Apocalypse represent the peoples, nations, and tongues of the Catholic Church, could be the key to understanding other important verses in this book. For example,


Apoc. 18:17 talks about how the shipmasters and the mariners wept over the destruction of the great city.

Apocalypse 18:17- "For in one hour are so great riches come to nought; and every shipmaster, and all that sail into the lake, and mariners, and as many as work in the sea, stood afar off, And cried, seeing the place of her burning, saying: What city is like to this great city?"


The shipmasters, mariners and those that work in the sea represent those who work with souls in the Catholic Church; that is, priests, religious, etc. They weep over the desolation of Rome and wonder how in such a short time she has been brought down.

Heretic Martin Luther
Heretical Monk Martin Luther
(Enemy of Catholic Thought)

Note:  Another attempt to privately interpret scripture!  These interpretations above are completely out of context.


Annotations: 1582 Douay

The Protestants here will needs have Babylon to be Rome, but not in St. Peter's epistle. But Babylon (according to all the Fathers) is signified, partly the whole society of the wicked, partly the city of Rome, only in respect of the terrene and heathenish seat of them that persecuted the Church. The Church of Rome is never called Babylon.


5. Babylon.] In the end of St. Peter's first Epistle, where the Apostle dateth it at Babylon, which the ancient writers (as we there noted) affirm to be meant of Rome: the Protestants will not in any wise have it so, because they would not be driven to confess that Peter ever was at Rome. But here for that they think it maketh for their opinion, that the Pope is Antichrist, and Rome the seat and city of Antichrist, they will needs have Rome to be this Babylon, this great whore, and this purple harlot. For such fellows, in the exposition of Holy Scripture, be led only by their prejudiced opinions and heresies, to which they draw all things without all indifferency and sincerity.

Tertullian also taketh it for Rome, thus, Babylon (saith he) in St. John is a figure of the city of Rome, being so great, so proud of the Empire, and the destroyer of the saints. Which is plainly spoken of that city, when it was heathen, the head of the terrene dominion of the world, the persecutor of the Apostles and their successors, the seat of Nero, Domitian, and the like, Christ's special enemies, the sink of idolatry, and false worship of the Pagan gods. Then was it Babylon, when St. John wrote this, and then was Nero and the rest figures of Antichrist, and that city the resemblance of the principal place (whosesoever it be) that Antichrist shall reign in, about the later end of the world.


In otherwise, Peter and Michael, the wicked persecutors which were the old Roman Empire, are a carbon copy of the evil empire which existed before the institution of the Church there; did persecute and will persecute the church in the last days. It proves you hold Rome to be a city. Here again in the following paragraph you state the same.



Most Holy Family Monastery:  Issue #4 page 2

Apocalypse 17:9- "And here is the understanding that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, upon which the woman sitteth, and they are seven kings." As stated already, Rome was constructed on seven hills. Since the great harlot sits upon the city of seven hills, the great harlot sits upon Rome itself – the center of unity in the Catholic Church And the home of the Roman Pontiffs.


Scripture scholars understand that St. Peter was writing this epistle from Rome, which he calls “Babylon.” Therefore, Rome is Babylon and Babylon has fallen. But if it has fallen, then it once stood strongly. And is this not true? For prior to its fall, Rome (Babylon) was the bulwark of Catholicism and the centre of Christianity - the great city.


Pope Benedict XIV, Apostolica Constitutio (# 4), June 26, 1749:

"... the Catholic Church is signified by the City of Rome alone, in which the bodily presence of this Apostle [Peter] is carefully reverenced..."3


Here again your trademark interpretation makes use of Pope Benedict XIV and his apostolic constitution as proof that Babylon is Rome alone. However, you should note that Pope Benedict stated that the Catholic Church is signified by the City of Rome alone and not Babylon alone, a huge difference. The City which is signified by Pope Benedict is the city which was elevated from her former state of iniquity by the Church, to a state of perfection. Pope Benedict could never say Babylon instead of Rome as that would go against Holy Scripture and assign the perfect dove to the society of the wicked.

St. Ambrose
St. Ambrose of Milan
Doctor of the Church

 Annotations: 1582 Douay

But St. Augustine, Aretas, and other writers, most commonly expound it, neither of Babylon itself a city of Chaldea or Egypt, nor of Rome, or any one city, which may be so called spiritually, as Jerusalem before, chap. 11, is named spiritual Sodom and Egypt: but of the general society of the impious, and of those that prefer the terrene kingdom and commodity of the world, before God and eternal felicity.


The author of the Commentaries upon the Apocalypse set forth in St. Ambrose name, writeth thus: This great whore sometime signifieth Rome, specially which at that time when the Apostle wrote this, did persecute the Church of God.  But otherwise it signifieth the whole city of the Devil, that is, the universal corps of the reprobate.



Now to apply that to the Roman Church and Apostolic See, either now or then, which was spoken only of the terrene (worldly) state of that city, as it was the seat of the Emperor, and not of Peter, when it did slay above 30 Popes Christ's Vicars, one after another, and endeavored to destroy the whole Church: that is most blasphemous and foolish. The Church in Rome was one thing, and Babylon in Rome another thing. Peter sat in Rome and Nero sat in Rome. But Peter, as in the Church of Rome: Nero, as in the Babylon of Rome.



As we can see this is a complete and utter fabrication of the truth...Let’s proceed to the seven hills interpretation.



Most Holy Family Monastery: “The Seven Hills”.

Apocalypse 17:9- "And here is the understanding that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, upon which the woman sitteth, and they are seven kings.”


It is a well know fact of history that the city of seven mountains (or hills) is Rome, Italy. This is because Rome was constructed on seven hills. Since the great harlot sits upon the city of seven hills, thus the great harlot sits upon Rome itself – the centre of unity in the Catholic Church and the home of the Roman Pontiffs.

Dear Peter and Michael, It is not a well known fact of history that the seven mountains or hills are Rome, Italy, I’m inclined to agree that its your private interpretation of scripture again. 2 Peter 1:20: “Understanding this first that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation”.


Annotations: 1582 Douay


9. Seven hills.] The Angel himself here expoundeth these 7 hills to be all one with the 7 heads and the 7 kings: and yet the Heretics blinded exceedingly with malice against the Church of Rome, are so made to take them for the seven hills literally, upon which in old time Rome did stand: that so they might make the unlearned believe that Rome is the seat of Antichrist. But if they had any consideration, they might mark that the Prophets visions here are most of them by Sevens, whether he talk of heads, horns, candlesticks, Churches, kings, hills, or other things: and that he alluded not to the hills, because they were just seven, but that Seven is a mystical number, as sometime Ten is, signifying universally all of that sort whereof he speaketh. As, that the seven heads, hills, or kingdoms (which are here all one) should be all the kingdoms of the world that persecute the Christians: being heads and mountains for their height in dignity above others.

And some take it, that there were seven special Empires, kingdoms, or States, that were or shall be the greatest persecutors of God's people, as of Egypt, Chanaan, Babylon, the Persians, and Greeks, which be five. Sixthly of the Roman Empire which once persecuted most of all other, and which (as the Apostle here saith) yet is, or standeth, but the seventh, then when St. John wrote this, was not come, neither is yet come in our days: which is Antichrist's state, which shall not come so long as the Empire of Rome standeth, as St. Paul did Prophesy, 2 Thess. 2.


Not a single thing to do with Rome or Italy! Or the Catholic Church….Lord help us!



Most Holy Family Monastery: Issue #2 page 2


In paragraph 4 you state that the abomination of desolation is a thing. Another scriptural interpretation from yourselves which starts the novelty of that book in which you claim that it is inescapable from previous statements that Christ is telling us that there are at least two time periods that contain the abomination of desolation.


It behooves me Peter and Michael, to tell you that you’ve lost the plot again by your tireless process of interpretation. The Fathers tell us that the abomination began in Jerusalem and would be fulfilled in the last days, which makes it two periods only. I will quote again the Fathers below: Please take note that the words first and fulfilled are referring to twice, keeping also in mind that Antichrist is to come at the end of the world. It also shows that the abomination of desolation is not a physical thing, but the destruction of the Mass. See below.


Matthew 24:15


[Side note] The abolishing of the holy sacrifice of the Mass by Antichrist and his ministers


15. Abomination of desolation.] This abomination of desolation foretold, was first partly fulfilled in diverse profanations of the Temple of Jerusalem, when the sacrifice and service of God was taken away. But specially it shall be fulfilled by Antichrist and his Precursors, when they shall abolish the holy Mass, which is the Sacrifice of Christ's body and blood, and the only sovereign worship due to God in his Church: as St. Hippolytus writeth in these words: The Churches shall lament with great lamentation, because there shall neither oblation be made, nor incense, nor worship grateful to God.


Most Holy Family Monastery:  Issue #4 Page 4

Apocalypse 17:6-7 -"And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.”


 If it is true that the Whore of Babylon is the phoney Catholic Church that began with the Vatican II revolution (as the evidence in this book overwhelmingly shows),  it would make sense that this apocalyptic entity is described as a woman, in order to contrast her with another woman – her antithesis – the Catholic Church.

"in order to restrain petulant spirits..."

"Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,--in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, --wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,--whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,--hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published."
(Council of Trent, Concerning the Edition and use of the Sacred Books, Second Decree April 8th, 1546)

Dear Peter and Michael, your interpretation of overwhelming is quite unusual; I must add that I’ve never used it in this context before, not as a paradox anyway, however! Let’s apply here some aspect of the truth. First of all let us be sure that the whore is definitely not a woman - let’s take a look at this statement in brackets promoting the fact that your own interpretation of scripture is overwhelming. It is not however overwhelming, it is, in this case and numerous others, an exaggeration of words and phrases to mislead the reader, a centuries old trick used in advertising to fool the gullible. The whore of Babylon is not the phoney Catholic Church that is presumed; the true [precise] meaning of this interpretation is, that it is the persecutors of Christians by the shedding of their blood from the beginning of Christianity to the end.  Here’s what the Holy Doctors have to say about the whore of Babylon below. 



Annotations: 1582 Douay

6. Drunken of the blood. ] It is plain that this woman signifieth the whole corps of all the persecutors that have and shall shed so much blood of the just: of the Prophets, Apostles, and other Martyrs from the beginning of the world to the end.


The Protestants foolishly expound it of Rome, for that there they put Heretics to death, and allow of their punishment in other countries: but their blood is not called the blood of saints, no more than the blood of thieves, mankillers, and other malefactors: for the shedding of which by order of justice, no Commonwealth shall answer.


If it were the case that the Woman was the phoney catholic Church, then it would be obvious that this phoney Church that the Dimonds  have invented from a scriptural perspective, would have been there throughout the Whole course of history, being that the Holy Doctors have acknowledged blood would be shed from the beginning to the end. I think we may then ask a pertinent question? How come the Church has not made the faithful aware of this piece of evidence given by divine grace to two modern prophets the Dimonds? Has this revelation been hidden? Are the Holy Doctors wrong? If so! Then Luther was right! We can join any religion of our choosing; if you believe that, then you’re a fool and it’s your own fault.


Now the errors in these books by Peter and Michael Dimond are so frequent and momentous, that if I blinked while reading I would be petrified at the proposition that I would inherit an erroneous disposition. I cannot possibly cover every page where error abounds, not wishing to be kind to you Peter and Michael for certain truths that are anyway in the public forum, such as our agreeability as to the destruction of the Mass, the false Popes since the beginning of Vat II - However I do not interpret scripture like a Hollywood script with a view to encourage the audience (faithful) by novelty or innovation. These are common errors among professed Catholics who are willing to believe the King James before the Douay, being mindful that new trends of belief are in vogue. 



Most Holy Family Monastery:  Issue #2 Page 12

 “However in Apocalypse 11 the two witnesses are understood to be Peter and Paul the princes of the apostles, the two pillars of the Church, the new dispensation”.


Dear Peter and Michael, You are basing all your booklets on the assumption that you are correct in your interpretation of scripture and here again you astoundingly nominate the dates of the ministry of Peter and Paul to be that of the two witnesses with their ministry lasting 30 years; that they are the two olive trees; lumping them together with the 1260 days prophecy of Daniel, as if to prove that they had the same meaning, interpretation, and connection to Three and a half years. You say that Thirty years and Three and a half years are the same, it’s just as well you’re not my math teacher.  Below again I supply the proper interpretation as supplied by the Holy Douay.


Annotations: 1582 Douay Chapter 11

St. John measuring the Temple 5. heareth of two witnesses that shall preach: 7. whom the beast coming up from the sea shall kill, 13. But they rising again ascend into heaven, 13. And seven thousand persons are slain when an earthquake: 13. And at the sound of the seventh Angel, the four and twenty seniors give praise and thanks to God. And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and it was said to me, Arise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that adore in it.

2. But the court which is without the temple, cast forth, and measure not that: because it is given to the Gentiles, and they shall tread under foot the holy city two and forty months:


3. And I will give to my two witnesses, and they shall prophecy a thousand two hundred sixty days, clothed with sack clothes.


4. These are the two olive trees and the two candlesticks that stand in the sight of our Lord of the earth.


*Three years and a half which is the time of Anti-Christ’s reign and persecution



Annotations:  1582 Douay Chapter 11

3. My two witnesses.] Enoch and Elias, as it is commonly expounded, For, that Elias shall come again before the later day, it is a most notorious known thing (to use St. Augustine's words) in the mouths and hearts of faithful men. See li. 20 de Civit. Dei c. 29; Tract. 4 in Ioan. and both of ep. 61 c. 11 and in Psal. 20; St. Ambrose in Psal. 45; St. Hilary 20 can. In Matt.; Prosper li. ultima de Promisionibus c. 13.; St. Gregory li. 14 Moral. c. 11 and ho. 12 in Ezech.; Beda in 9 Marci. The Greek Fathers also, as St. Chrysostom ho. 58 in Mat. and ho. 4 in 2 Thessal. and ho. 22 in ep. Ad Hebr.; Theophylacte and Oecumenius in 17 Matthai; St. Damascene li. 4 de Orthodoxa fide c. 27.


Furthermore, that they live also in Paradise, it is partly gathered out of the Scripture Ecclici.


44:16 where it is plainly said of Enoch, that he is translated into Paradise, as all our Latin exemplars do read: and of Elias, that he was taken up alive, it is evident 4 Reg. 2. And St. Irenaeus saith, it is the tradition of the Apostles, that they be both there. li. 5 in initio. Dicunt Presbyteri (saith he) qui sunt Apostolorum Discipuli. So lay the Priests or Ancients that are the scholars of the Apostles. See St. Justin q. 85 ad orthodoxos.


Finally, that they shall return into the company of men in the end of the world, to preach against Antichrist, invite both Jews and Gentiles to penance, and so be martyred, as this place of the Apocalypse seemeth plain, so we have in part other testimonies hereof. Malac. 4; Eccles. 44:16, 48:10.; Matt. 17:11. See also Hippolytus book of Antichrist and the end of world. All which being well considered, the Heretics are to contentious and incredulous, to discredit the same, as they commonly do.

[Side note] Enoch and Elias yet alive, shall preach in the time of Antichrist.



 Dear Brothers, as you can see 1260 days and the ministry of Peter and Paul have nothing to do with Apocalypse 11 period. In Relation to the Three and a half years, it is as stated and not thirty years, proof supplied!

St. John
St. John the Evangelist
In the fourteenth year of Domitian, whilst this same was stirring up the second persecution
after that of Nero, St. John he was exiled to the Island of Patmos where he wrote his Apocalypse.



 Annotations: Apocalypse 20 1582 Douay


7. Satan.] In the whole 8th chapter of the said 10th book de Civitate Dei in St. Augustine, is a notable commentary of these words. Where first he declareth, that neither this binding nor loosing of Satan is in respect of seducing or not seducing the Church of God: proving that whether he be bound or loose, he can never seduce the same. The same (saith he) shall be the state of the Church at that time when the Devil is to be loosed, even as since it was instituted, the same hath it been and shall be at all time in her children that succeed each other by birth and death, and a little after. This I thought was therefore to be mentioned, lest any man should think, that during the little time wherein the Devil shall be loosed, the Church shall not be upon the earth, he either not finding it here when he shall be let loose, or consuming it when he shall by all means persecute the same. Secondly he declareth, that the Devil to be bound, is nothing else but not to be permitted by God to exercise all his force or fraud in temptations: as to be loosed, is to be suffered by God for a small time, that is, for three years and a half, to practice and prove all his power and arts of temptations against the Church and her children, and yet not to prevail against them. Thirdly this Doctor showeth by what great mercy our Lord hath tied Satan and abridged his power during the whole millenary or thousand years, which is all the time of the new Testament: until then: and with what wisdom he permitteth him to break loose that little time of three years and six months, toward the later day, which shall be the reign of Antichrist. Lastly he showeth what kind of men shall be most subject to the Devil's seduction, (even such as now by temptation of Heretics go out of the Church) and who shall avoid it.


Most Holy Family Monastery:  Issue #2 page 13

Quote: So that the part of Peters ministry that is in common to St. Paul’s could be said to start with St. Paul’s conversion in 37 A.D. meaning that It lasted 30 years and would coincide with Daniels prophecy of 1260 days (30 yrs).


Dear Peter and Michael, Let’s be assured of one fact here! St Peter’s ministry has nothing in common with St. Paul’s conversion, by the very obvious fact that St. Peter was then the Head of the Church on earth and assumed the title of Roman Pontiff; as yet St. Paul was only converted to Catholicism and required the confirmation of St. Peter. St. Peter was already preaching well before St. Paul’s conversion, which puts your 1260 days theory up in smoke. However more to the point is the fact as I have demonstrated above that the two witnesses do not refer to Peter and Paul, but to Enoch and Elias.


Most Holy Family Monastery:  Issue #2 Page 14-16


Poor Peter and Michael, you then go on and introduce all kind of dates and numerical equations; (pages 14-16) totting up the hours, days and years, adding, dividing, multiplying, subtracting, including pieces of scripture about stolen sheep and oxen, cutting off shepherds and introducing  dates of individuals and other novelties, to prove your theories.  On the basis of this evidence one could be forgiven for entertaining the notion that cabalistic tendencies are apparent. You employ the Julian colander and Denis the Little to further entertain your illusions. It is of course the Julian calendar not colander I know, however I’ve used the term colander to denote the word sieve which is full of holes just like your interpretation of Holy Scripture. Such entertainment value has never to be seen in the Catholic Church till now which is more in tune with Hollywood than things Divine; an extravaganza of false doctrines worse than the Vatican II sect and their motley assemblies. You finish up on page 19 summarising your theories and coming to a profound esoteric understanding of Apoc 12 relating to the seven beasts as "popes" [an error in itself] and then nominate them ALL [True Popes and false popes] to be EQUAL agents of Antichrist?  


Most Holy Family Monastery Issue #2 Page 18

“And there was seen another sign in heaven: behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns…” (Apocalypse 12:3) Thus the scriptures say that the beast with seven heads is the seven Emperors who rule from Rome during the fulfillment of the Apocalypse.



To pour more vinegar on our Lord's lips you compile a list of "popes" which you foolishly labelled as the seven heads of apocalypse 17:9 (issue #2 pages 19.) You use a series of numbers shown below to fool those poor souls who believe in your mystical formula, maintaining that such integers should be reasonably accepted to total up seven "popes" [note: attributing to Antipope John XXIII (23) more "measurable" value over Christ's Vicar Pius XI (11) - by 12 "scientific" points - giving Pope Gregory XVII a negative value?? in your secret recipe "Theology"?] representative of the seven heads of (Apoc 17). 

Benedict XV    (15)        True Pope

 Pius XI             (11)      True Pope

Pius XII            (12)       True Pope

John XXIII        (23)        (Antipope)

Paul VI              (6)       (Antipope)

John Paul I        (1)        (Antipope)

John Paul II       (2)        (Antipope)

Total                70



Here is demonstrated an infection of cabalistic proportions that has permeated the boundaries of truth, a deadly mutation which has sprung violently from the depths of the outer darkness, its authors "begin" to unravel the mysteries of Holy Scripture, coming up with all kind of cabalistic computations, portraying their belief that the above mentioned "popes" are the fallen heads of Apocalypse; in the process mercilessly condemning three Holy Pontiffs to an eternity of suffering? - and  keeping with a common agenda of condemning those who are not in tune with their illusions.

Pope Benedict XV Pope Pius XI Pope Pius XII
"Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Christ's Vicars (Representatives on Earth) from left to right: Benedict XV; Pius XI; Pius XII

"They are all heretics!" They frequently scream; their verbal attacks like a tireless whip, while they themselves pour poison so lethal into the Holy fountain of knowledge. All this being said, there is a proper understanding of truth to help in raising the understanding of the human mind to that of true Catholic ideals. Please see explanation below:

Annotations: 1582 Douay …The Beast & Seven Heads


A beast coming up.] This beast is the universal company of the wicked, whose head is Antichrist: and the same is called (Apoc 17) the whore of Babylon.  The 7 heads be expounded seven kings (Apoc 17) five before Christ, one present, and one to come. The 10 horns be also there expounded to be 10 kings that shall reign a short while after Antichrist. This dragon is the Devil, by whose power the whore or beast or Antichrist worketh. For in the words follow (v. 3 & 4) Antichrist is called the beast, to whom the dragon, that is, the Devil giveth that power of feigned miracles. And as we adore God for giving power to Christ and his followers, so they shall adore the Devil for assisting Antichrist and giving him power.


We may now ask the obvious questions: If five Kings have gone before Christ, One King when He was Present, and One King to come; where in goodness name did you conjure up seven "popes" before and during Vatican II?  There could only be one King after Christ. This one King or Head is Antichrist. It is clear that there is only one King left to fulfil Prophecy which is Antichrist. He is of the seven heads or Kings, and is also the eighth; “This is Antichrist”. Do you realise that you have condemned three good Roman Pontiffs to Hell? The other four antipopes of Vatican II are the precursors of Antichrist who have abolished the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.


Most Holy Family Monastery: Issue #2 Page 24

On Page 24 you state that JPII is the Eighth Beast again displaying a lack of understanding of Scripture. Here again is the proper interpretation!



Annotations: 1582 Douay

A beast coming up.]  This beast is the universal company of the wicked, whose head is Antichrist: and the same is called (Apoc 17) the whore of Babylon.


It is clear here that the beast is not JPII, which may I add is proved by his death, and your error proclaiming him to be so, need one say any more? Martin Luther would have loved you on his team!


Most Holy Family Monastery:  Page 19 issue #2


Quote:" She is the woman who is telling us to start counting the seven emperors

Our Lady of Fatima appeared in 1917, during the reign of Benedict XV, The seven heads of the beast are therefore:    Benedict the XVPius XIPius XIIJohn XXIIIPaul VIJohn Paul I & John Paul II.


 We can CLEARLY SEE see here that Our Lady, of Apocalypse whom you quote in chapter 12 is not telling us to start counting the seven emperors you maintain are seven "popes". In fact it’s not Our Lady at all; the woman of Apocalypse 12 is a symbol of the Church. To designate [and disseminate] that three Holy Pontiffs [Benedict XV, Pius XI, and Pius XII] are "heads of the beast" is consummate BLASPHEMY which cries out to Heaven for vengence!


Note: before I finish I would like to address the issue on the Mass and your insistence that we can go to the SSPX. First let me make a few points in relation to this matter which should have alarm bells ringing in your ears, hopefully!



Daniel: Strength will be given him against the continual sacrifice 


Our Lady:  One day, through my Rosary and Scapular, I will save the world: If Our Lady said that Her Rosary would save the world its because the Mass would not be available in its generality, for if the Mass were available, then it would be the Mass itself and not the Rosary that would save the world.



Holy Scripture and the Doctors have declared that the Mass will be extinguished.



Here is one of the many commentaries by the Fathers in the 1582 Douay:


Matthew 24:15

15.Abomination of desolation.] This abomination of desolation foretold, was first partly fulfilled in diverse profanations of the Temple of Jerusalem, when the sacrifice and service of God was taken away. But specially it shall be fulfilled by Antichrist and his Precursors, when they shall abolish the holy Mass, which is the Sacrifice of Christ's body and blood, and the only sovereign worship due to God in his Church: as St. Hippolytus writeth in these words: The Churches shall lament with great lamentation, because there shall neither oblation be made, nor incense, nor worship grateful to God.

But the sacred houses of Churches shall be like to cottages, and the precious body and blood of Christ shall not be extant (openly in Churches) in those days, the Liturgy (or Mass) shall be extinguished, the Psalmody shall cease, the reciting of the Scriptures shall not be heard. Hippol. de Antichristo. By which it is plain that the Heretics of these days be the special fore-runners of Antichrist.



Dear Peter and Michael, I’ve underlined this important part to explain as clearly as possible what this piece of scripture means, why it’s so important and why I’ve left it till last. These annotations from the Doctors clearly inform us that there will be no Mass in the last days. Firstly, it states that the precursors (Those who come before Antichrist) will abolish the Mass; we can now say with surety and without hesitation that this has happened. Secondly it informs us that the Mass will be extinguished; in other words put out. You will pay attention to the fact that it does not say suspended but extinguished. Thirdly it informs us that the churches will be like cottages. Now I’d appreciate if you would allow a little common sense to prevail here. If the Mass is already gone; (novus ordo false mass) fulfilling the part that the houses will be like cottages (no Mass there) How in Gods good name can the SSPX be saying Mass openly in the Churches, against the very words of Holy Scripture, the writings of the fathers, the old and new Testament, and be still attached to the novus ordo calamity, while praying for a false pope; and on your recommendation you are sending poor souls to attend…are you nuts? Has insanity gone mad? They do not have any jurisdiction which is another debate. If the Mass is abolished then why are you sending the faithful to a false mass period…Stop! Individuals should say the Holy Rosary every Sunday to fulfill their Sunday duty if they cannot get to a true Mass. This is almost impossible, unless you go to one of the priests anointed in the order of Pope Gregory XVII.


 Pope Gregory XV
Pope Gregory XVII (The Hostage Pope)




Apocalypse 12:1

2. And being with child, she cried also travailing, and is in anguish to be delivered.


"In that travail she gives birth to some definite person who is to rule the church with a rod of iron. It then points to a conflict waged within the church to elect one who is to rule all nations in the manner clearly stated. In accord with the text this is unmistakably a Papal election for only Christ and his Vicar has the divine right to rule all nations. Furthermore, the church does not travail in anguish in every papal election, which can be held without trouble or danger. But at this time the great powers may take a menacing attitude to hinder the election of a logical and expected candidate by threats of a general apostasy, assassination or imprisonment of this candidate if elected.  Now this would suppose an extremely hostile mind of the governments of Europe towards the church and would cause intense anguish towards the church because an extended interregnum in the papacy is always disastrous and more so in a time of universal persecution. If Satan would contrive to hinder a Papal election the church would suffer great travail …"

Father Herman Kramer 1955 Book of Destiny p. 278



It is obvious to anyone with skin on his nose that this was Pope Gregory XVII who was imprisoned for a period of Thirty years. In a recent debate someone mentioned the fact that because Pope Gregory had never donned the Tiara, while agreeing that he was validly elected, was not validly Coronated because the Tierra was never placed on his head. The answer to this type "logic" is clear; if Pope Gregory XVII was validly elected but was refused the Tiara under duress, then the question must be raised, who has the right to the Papacy- the One elected, or the Jewish infiltrators who usurped the throne and gave away the Tiara to the communist dictator U’Thant, the then secretary general of the Masonic U.N.?

Answer: The one elected; Pope Gregory XVII (Cardinal Giuseppe Siri) The Hostage Pope. See Canon 185: 1917 Code of Canon Law.


Apocalypse 12:4

4. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth, and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered: that when she should be delivered, he might devour her son.


"(Devour Her Son) Satan’s intention is to subject the newly elected Pope also to the purposes of the world powers to plot his death. He may contrive an assurance of safety and immunity from harm for the cardinals to convene for the election, the more easily to take the Pope elect prisoner. The dragon will want to intimidate the new Pope into non interference to let affairs run and develop as heretofore. In that way he will devour the son, absorb the Papacy and alone direct and rule the world. "

Fr. Herman Kramer…Book of Destiny p. 284. 


"But this “Son” will hardly have time to purify the Church before he is persecuted and martyred. "

Fr. Herman Kramer…Book of Destiny p. 286



Father Kramer studied the Apocalypse for thirty years from 1925 to 1955. His interpretations are precisely in keeping with the 1582 version of the Douay Rheims annotations, as interpreted by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. They are a tremendous reference to the apocalyptic writings of Holy Scripture.



And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and on her head a crown of twelve stars.



Annotations: 1582 Douay


This is properly and principally spoken of the Church: and by allusion, of our Blessed Lady also.


6. The woman fled.] This great persecution that the Church shall flee from, is in the time of Antichrist, and shall endure but three years and a half, as is noted v. 14 in the margin. In which time for all that, she shall not want our Lord's protection, nor true Pastors, nor be so secret, but all faithful men shall know and follow her: much less shall she decay, err in faith, or degenerate and follow Antichrist, as Heretics do wickedly feign.


The moon represents the unchanging character of the Church….Fr. Herman Kramer Book of Destiny.

The twelve stars are the twelve apostles.

Our Lady of La Salette
Statues of Our Lady of La Salette, and the two seers Melanie and Maximin (La Salette, France)
"In the year 1864, Lucifer together with a large number of demons will be unloosed from hell; they will put an end to faith little by little, even in those dedicated to God. They will blind them in such a way, that, unless they are blessed with a special grace, these people will take on the spirit of these angels of hell; several religious institutions will lose all faith and will lose many souls." -Our Lady of La Salette (La Salette, France September 19th, 1846 A.D.)



Dear Brothers Peter and Michael, as I look upon the good and the bad in your many articles, there are three  main errors that you have fallen into in your enthusiasm to serve Our Lord. I do believe that your intentions are generally good even though your application is totally misguided and has created many difficulties.


1.On Dogma: Your Principle errors- In defending the Dogma “Outside the Church There Is No Salvation” is admirable, however, you have  allowed yourself to be sidetracked by getting involved in Baptism of Blood and Desire. You managed to lump “No Salvation Dogma” and “Baptism of Desire and Blood” together, catapulting you into an area of conflict which I believe in my humble opinion, is beyond your expertise and understanding. Being so caught up in yourselves you tended to use the sources of the Church in an almost fanatical manner to prove your point.

There is no salvation Outside the Church! Of this I am sure; however my understanding of this Dogma is determined by the evidence of the Church; no more is required of me in this regard to undermine my Catholicity.


You have however exceeded those boundaries, comparable to those of the Luther of centuries past, who managed to convince others, that he was correct and everyone else was wrong.


2. Pride: Spurred on by this new found confidence to determine matters of you’re own choosing, and using information imprudently and incorrectly, you managed to endow yourselves a new sense of confidence which would only lead you to your second condition, that of questioning the Doctors and Saints, Church history, Catechisms, canon law and other overwhelming evidence supplied by Mother Church, and even reason itself. Your charisma moved you forward like a speeding train, going nowhere fast; however the blinkers were on as you flattened anyone who disagreed with your train of thought, just like the obstinate Luther himself. You refused to listen to any form of advice from anyone; maybe because no one had given your own works a thorough examination, and your methodology of forcing your own opinion. Baptism of Desire does not conflict with No Salvation Dogma; far greater minds then you or I have already confirmed this and have not even once been censured by the Church.


3. Interpretation of things Holy: Having reached the point of no return I endear you to slow down and observe your malady. Your present disposition of interpreting Scripture from totally Non-Catholic sources and putting your own spin on matters should have alarm bells ringing from Canada to Mexico; the Devil having fooled you completely. If you think I’m too severe in my writings to you, I would appeal to you to cast your mind to the greatest of severities you will face, if you fail to act upon good advice given by myself, whose main intention it is to advise you of your present misery and to stop you misleading others. 


Baptism of Desire: Finally, Dear Brothers, the greatest of all your errors which have been enumerated, if one were to put it in a nutshell, would be your fanaticism of Baptism of Desire and Blood. You have endeavoured to cause a controversy of gigantic proportions in raising this subject in the Catholic world, one which was sadly started by the renowned Father Feeney (for the wrong reasons) commonly known as the Feeneyite madness. You have demonstrated a willingness to continue in pursuance of his practice, of causing confusion within the ranks of those Catholics who are genuinely seeking to find truth in these extremely difficult times. Dear Brothers Peter and Michael, You should never have entered into this deep theological discussion about matters which Mother Church has not taught as the principal means of salvation. Her sound reasons for not doing so have been retained by her authoritative power; we don’t have the right to question her wisdom; In your haste to do so, you have assumed the authority of the latter and caused division instead of unity among Catholics. The most Holy Roman Catholic Church has “never” and I say again! “NEVER” stirred such emotion, controversy, confusion, and debate as you have managed to generate, by your misguided notions of Church teachings. You have allowed your faith to be derailed by such controversies and your behaviour is totally unacceptable.  Is there not enough eloquence within the bosom of the Mother Church to keep you occupied for an eternity, instead of disrupting the Church and Her Children in this time of famine for the word of God? Don’t let the Devil lead you in circles; you’ve done great work on some of your videos including the Mass; you’ve excelled in exposing the False Antipopes of Vatican II and other unchristian practices; I implore you instead to use your ability constructively by meticulous examination of true sources, using prudently these same sources to help, rather then hinder the Faith.


A word of warning! I implore you stand back and look at the trees, examine those sources you put your trust in; see if you have given out erroneous doctrines, make a self-examination and ask yourselves if you wrongly used interpretations of doctrine and Church writings; ask yourselves have you been over critical of others including the Doctors, Saints and general public; are you over scrupulous and fanatical? My last piece of advice I would tender is this; don’t think for the Church; think with it.


Dear Peter and Michael, I dare not go any further into these books of yours, to do so would take years of work given that there are so many errors contained within, that I do not have time to address here, I’ve only covered about twenty pages of your writings. There are matters here that are so far from the truth that it’s horrible to see your confusion.  However I sincerely hope you understand the difficulties you have created and undo them as quickly as you possibly can. You ought to burn these compilations without hesitation and seek out proper Catholic sources. I firmly believe that if you make the right choice where pride is kept at bay, you could still serve Our Lord in a profound way. If you need any more assistance I am at your disposal. Below is a short list of your infallible pronouncements….Your opinion?  I wish you every success and pray that God will grant you the graces necessary to do His Will.

Most "Holy" Family Monastery…A doctrine of Ambiguity, Condemnations and Haste


Catholic Sources that

You hold in Contempt


1917 code of Canon Law

Pius X

St. Augustine

St. Cyprian

St. Thomas

St. Ambrose

St. Bede

St. Bernard

Pius IX

Butler Publishers

Trent on Baptism of Desire

Pope Benedict XV

Pope Pius XI

Pius XII

Holy Scripture

Unbaptised catechumens

Nearly all Traditionalists

Pope Gregory XVII 1958-1989

V2 Sect "masses" in union with the Satanic Freemasonic Antipapacy

St. Alphonsus Liguori


Your opinion



Has errors

Erroneous Catechism

A fallible human







Not reliable

Poorly written

Head of Beast

Head of Beast

Head of Beast

You misinterpret

Not Baptised

Are Heretics

Accept (via trusted non-external forum evidence [witnesses]) he was lawfully elected Christ's Vicar [Pope] in
(hidden to public eyes)
1958 Conclave and immediately put under grave duress [inhibiting his free will] - by masonic infiltrator "Cardinals" -
Then they - (beginning precisely following public release [Sept 2005] of Fr. Khoat's eyewitness testimony [from 1988] further confirming that Pope Gregory XVII was under grave duress by the masons- his entire pontificacy) JUDGE [publish in Nov 2005] that Christ's Vicar Gregory XVII "stopped" being Christ's Vicar

Tell all to attend these mortally sinful sacrileges - Michael Dimond goes himself minus his "relgious" habit to ("heroically") avoid conflict i.e. "making waves" with V2 sect members

Has bad Theology


Non -Catholic Sources

that You esteem


Challoner Bible

Haydock Bible

New Jerusalem Bible

Caroline White

New Age Rock and Roll
















Your opinion





Ecumenical (Novus Ordo)

Protestant in Oxford


















Time is Short…I pray for you all.


May God grant you all your graces; in the love of Jesus and Mary,


Patrick Walsh



Note: Additional content from TCW's (July 27, 2009) Bullet Point Briefs:

Mr. Fred Dimond of Allegany County
Mr. Fred Dimond
N.Y. Man (Fred Dimond) Named In Million Dollar Federal Racketeering Case

  • Large Donor Eric E. Hoyle Finally Realized Fred ("Michael") Dimond Was A Heretic/Counterfeit Monk

    TCW's Comment: Mr. Eric E. Hoyle, (a soul who was duped hook-line-and-sinker by Mr. Fred ("Michael") Dimond's deceptive and wicked propaganda) finally realized that the New York state resident Dimond was a fraud- by Dimond's "ordering" the attendence of his subjects/donors (like Holye) to Novus Ordo sect "masses" una cum the Judeo-Masonic Antipope Ben 16. Hoyle then promptly left. Two others at this Feeneyite Den of Depravity "MHFM" in Fillmore, NY, also left the same day as Hoyle.

    Hoyle has taken *court action against the self-appointed "head" of "MHFM" (Fred Dimond) to recover damages and restitution citing (under US law) constructive fraud, unjust enrichment, monies had and received, violation of the federal civil RICO statute (Racketeering) deceptive trade practice and false advertising. See: US Court Document on the Case.

    *Note: The court case went on for some years. The Western District of New York court ruled in late 2012, that it "would not become involved in adjudicating beliefs" per the the First Amendment (a masonic doctrine of the US government -ED).

  • Close Window

    Bookmark this site Web Productions Inc.