Recent Featured Videos and ArticlesEastern “Orthodoxy” RefutedHow To Avoid SinThe Antichrist Identified!What Fake Christians Get Wrong About EphesiansWhy So Many Can't Believe“Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World ExistsAmazing Evidence For GodNews Links
Vatican II “Catholic” Church ExposedSteps To ConvertOutside The Church There Is No SalvationE-ExchangesThe Holy RosaryPadre PioTraditional Catholic Issues And GroupsHelp Save Souls: Donate


Questions and Answers

Where in Portugal is the dogma of Faith being preserved and by whom?

September 23, 2006

Dear Brothers,

Where in Portugal is the dogma of Faith being preserved and by whom? I am referring to what the Blessed Mother told Sister Lucia in Fatima.  I surmise that the Blessed Mother is stating that it is the country, as a whole, that will be preserving the Catholic Faith until, I assume, Christ's Second Coming .. can you offer an explanation?




Since we don’t have the complete sentence, we cannot say for sure, but it could be:

“In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved in a faithful remnant…”
“In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved until the Great Apostasy…”

About Consecration to Mary

September 22, 2006

Dear Brothers Dimond

I wish to make a Consecration of myself to Mary, following the St Louis de Montfort method.  However, I note that on the day of Consecration we are supposed to receive Holy Communion and make the Act after this, as well as make an offering such as light a candle to Our Lady in Church.  In these times of apostasy, I am unable to attend a Catholic Mass (only the Indult is available), and I would appreciate your advice on how a person should make the Consecration in these circumstances of not being able to receive Holy Communion or visit a Catholic Church that is not connected with the counterfeit Catholic Church.

Best wishes


Thanks for the question. There is no obligation to make the Consecration to Mary before a priest or in a church, especially today. You should make it in your home.

On the Last Gospel of the Mass from St. John

September 19, 2006

In the Last Gospel of the Mass from St. John we read:

"But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

What does the bold faced quotations mean - what does it refer to? Does "born" refer to baptism. It seems pretty clear to me, but I may not be understanding it clearly. Could you give me a take on what it might mean? I read it  every Sunday at Mass and wonder it's meaning.



Thanks for the question. Yes, we have an opinion about this verse. This was actually mentioned in our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation (section 22). While we cannot say infallibly what this particular verse means since the Church has never issued any infallible declaration on this specific verse, here is what is said about it in the book. We think the correct conclusion is pretty obvious:

John 1:12-13-“But as many as received Him, to them He gave power to become the sons of God: to them that believe in His name: WHO ARE BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD.”

The context of the passage is dealing with “becoming the sons of God,” that which St. Paul called “adoption of sons” (Rom. 8:15). This is the theological and scriptural term for Justification, the state of sanctifying grace (Trent, Sess. 6, Chap. 4). The term signifies the transition from being a child of Adam (the state of original sin) to becoming an adopted son of God (the state of sanctifying grace). Pope St. Leo the Great, in fact, confirms that this passage of St. John’s Gospel is talking about becoming a son of God by the Sacrament of Baptism.

Pope St. Leo the Great, Sermon 63: On the Passion (+ c. 460 A.D.): “… from the birth of baptism an unending multitude are born to God, of whom it is said: Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God (Jn. 1:15).” (The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 151.)

So as God, through St. John, is describing man’s being “born again” to the state of grace in Baptism, He speaks of those who are born, “NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD”! The “will of the flesh” is desire. The “will of man” is desire. “Blood” is blood. In my opinion, what God is saying here in this very verse is that in order to become a son of God – in order to be justified – it does not suffice to be born again of blood or desire (i.e., baptism of blood or desire). One must be born again of God. The only way to be born again of God is to be baptized with water in the name of God: in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:19).

Can one attend a lecture on Creationism by a Protestant?

September 18, 2006

Dear Br Dimond.

A protestant invites me to attend a lecture on creation by another protestant this Friday. It's not in any protestant temple and there's no religious service. If there's no praying together, can I attend it? Thanks


Yes, we don’t see any reason why you couldn’t go unless attacking the Catholic Faith is somehow an integral part of his presentation on Creation (which we highly doubt). You should at least try to convert the Protestant who invited you, of course, if you haven’t done so already.

What did the Third Secret of Fatima contain?

September 15, 2006

I heard Brother Michael's interview on Coast to Coast.  I cannot believe they let that lunatic JC yell and scream away on the airways.  Anyway, I do have a serious question: If the 3rd secret given at Fatima by Our Lady was never revealed or made public, how do we (or how does Brother Michael) know what it contained?

Thank you!
Susanna Szilard


Thank you for your question. While we don’t know infallibly, we can say almost with certainty (based on a number of things) that the Third Secret concerns apostasy from the Catholic Faith by people who purport to hold positions of authority in Rome.

First, the very words which come just before the undisclosed Third Secret are: “In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved… etc. [Third Secret].” Since these are the last words before the Third Secret, they imply that the Third Secret deals with the dogma of Faith not being preserved. 

Second, people who have commented on the Third Secret, including high-ranking members of the Vatican II sect – who purport to have read the Third Secret or to have acquired intimate knowledge of its contents (including Joseph Ratzinger, “Cardinal” Ciappi) – reveal that it has to do with the loss of the Faith.

"In the Third Secret [of Fatima] it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top." (Mario L. Ciappi, “cardinal” and household theologian to John Paul II, quoted in The Devil's Final Battle, p. 33)

Third, Our Lady said it would be clearer in 1960, and this was just after Vatican II was called – the very council which put into motion the major apostasy from the Faith we are all now living through.

Was Elizabeth Ann Seton validly canonized a ‘saint’?

September 10, 2006


I have enjoyed watching your online videos.  I suppose my favorite is the "Creation and Miracles, Past and Present." The point about the earth being only around 5,000 years old is major.  If our world is only 5,000 years old, it would make a person's life feel a lot more significant than if the earth is millions and millions of years old.  The theory of evolution is a depressing topic.

Anyway, in your "Creation" video, Padre Pio is featured, a favorite saint of mine… Are there some saints in the church that could not really be saints?  There have been some questions about the sainthood of Elizabeth Seton.  Some have stated that there was a heavy lobby in Rome to make her a saint because she was an American, and one of the necessary miracles was dispensed with in order to make her a saint.  Is this true?  I was converted to Catholicism in the mid-80's by in older, more traditional Catholic priest, and he gave Elizabeth Seton as my saint.  I've never really cared for that saint.

I've listened to the recorded versions of your 2 radio broadcasts... I think they have gone well and wish you the best in the future.


Dona Beall


Dona, thank you for your comments. Elizabeth Ann Seton was "canonized" by Antipope Paul VI in 1975.  He obviously had no authority to canonize, since he was an antipope.  This does not mean that Elizabeth Ann Seton is not in Heaven or wouldn't be worthy of canonization by a true pope; it simply means that, as of yet, she has never been canonized and therefore we cannot say infallibly that she is to be numbered among the saints.

When is it a Catholic’s duty to recognize a Pope?

September 7, 2006

This is to address a question arising after having visited your web-site. Does canon law & the magisterium of the Church ( both Pre & Post Vatican II ) allow for the perfect liberty of a member of the Church (in rightful conscience) to believe that the Seat of Peter is vacant? Are their any circumstances where Sedevacantism is not permitted? Thank you for your reply.

Yours In Christ,
Marta Klein


Thank you for your question. He who is elected as the Bishop of Rome – by the clergy of Rome in the first millennium, and by the College of Cardinals in the second millennium (or, in rare cases, by a pope appointing his successor) – must always be accepted as the pope unless there is clear evidence that the election was invalid or that the man “elected” is a manifest heretic (as taught by Pope Paul IV). In the case of the Vatican II “popes,” they are undeniable manifest heretics and have presided over a new religion and a new gospel which contradicts what all the true popes have taught from St. Peter on. It is definite, therefore, that they cannot be accepted as true popes based on the very teaching of the validly elected popes themselves.

“If one adds ‘Amen’, is the baptism valid?”

September 5, 2006

Dear Bro. Diamond,

     If one adds "Amen" after "I baptize thee, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” is the baptism valid or by saying "Amen" does that make it invalid.

God love you,



Thanks for the question. No, adding “amen,” which means “truly,” does not affect the validity of the baptism. It does not change the meaning of the essential form.

Is the New Rite of Confirmation valid?

September 4, 2006

Dear Bros Dimonds,

I went through RCIA and was confirmed into the Catholic Church Easter of 2001 by a Novus Ordo priest.  Did I receive any of the graces associated with this sacrament? 




The short answer to your question is no. Since the new confirmation cannot be considered valid (see below), you did not receive the graces associated with this sacrament. The New Order of Confirmation was promulgated on Aug. 15, 1971. The form and the matter of the sacrament have been changed. The traditional form for the sacrament of confirmation is:

“I sign you with the Sign of the Cross, and I confirm you with the Chrism of salvation. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”
The new form in the New Rite for the sacrament of confirmation:
“N., receive the seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit.”
As one can see the traditional form of Confirmation has been fundamentally changed. The new form actually uses a form that is used in the Eastern Rite. Why would Paul VI replace the traditional form in the Roman Rite with the form of the Eastern Rite? We will see the significance of this change when we look at the matter of Confirmation, which has also been changed. (more…)

When was the Rite of Baptism changed?

September 3, 2006

Dear Brothers,

I was baptized during the period of time when many of Paul VI's changes were taking place and I'm concerned about the validity of my baptism. I know the Episcopal rite of consecration was changed on June 18, 1968 and put into effect (I believe) on April 1, 1969, but when was the rite of baptism changed?



The New Order of Baptism was promulgated by Paul VI on May 15, 1969. The essential form remains valid (unless the Novus Ordo “priest” decided to change it on his own); and, since anyone can validly baptize, those baptized with it would be considered validly baptized. But the removal of things around the essential form by Paul VI – while not destroying validity – serves to further confirm his revolutionary agenda. The questions “do you renounce Satan?” and “Do you believe…?” are now directed toward the “parents and godparents”; they are no longer directed toward the candidate for baptism. In the new rite, the candidate for baptism is not even asked if he believes. Also, a newly baptized child no longer receives a white garment – it is only mentioned symbolically. The candidate for baptism is no longer required to make a baptismal vow. In addition, all the exorcisms of the devil are omitted in the Paul VI’s new rite of Baptism! Why would one remove the exorcism prayers? Although Satan is mentioned in the texts, he is not banished. Conclusion: As long as the person baptizing in the Novus Ordo Church pours water (hitting the forehead) and uses the essential form – “I baptize thee, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” – with the intention to do what the Church does, then the baptism is valid, despite these other problems in the surrounding rite. But these changes to the rite of Baptism, although not essential to validity, serve to reveal the true character and intentions of the men who have implemented the Vatican II revolution.  Moreover, in some cases doubt has arisen about whether the water actually strikes the forehead when it is poured in the Novus Ordo rite.  If there is any doubt about whether the water sufficiently made contact with the forehead,  a conditional baptism should be performed when a person is convinced on all the issues and ready.

How To Perform A Baptism & A Conditional Baptism

“What if my wife does not want to attend the Traditional Church?”

….what if my wife does not want to attend the traditional church you recommend and she wants to stay at the novus ordo?

thank you,
David D


You simply must tell your wife that she cannot go to the Novus Ordo (the New Mass).  A major problem today – and we hear all the time from people who ask questions very similar to yours (concerning a spouse who opposes them in their pursuit of salvation and truth) – is that so many make the devastating mistake of marrying a man or a woman who doesn’t care about the Faith.  People don’t think too much about that when they get married, but it often turns out to be a life-long mistake.

“Am I too young to be interested in the truth?”

September 2, 2006


I'm Jocel de Souza and I came across your organisation by means of the DVDs prepared by you. Especially the ones prepared by Bro. Michael Dimond. And upon watching them, I've been left confused, troubled,amazed, etc. I've also had a large number of doubts that I wish to clarify. The most amazing DVD I've watched yet was Creation and Miracles: Past And Present. I'm Catholic for sure but some of the videos by you I've watched contradicts what I've thought about myself for all of my life. I can promise you if you have my doubts clarified and you indeed posess the truth I'll do whatever it takes to help you carry out your good work. Because I've searched for the truth my entire life and for some reason I feel that I could find it with you. So please keep in touch with me.

I live in Goa - India. And I'm 17 years of age. I hope you do not consider me too young to be involved in all of this.

Jocel de Souza


You are certainly not too young to be interested in these matters.  In fact, it’s true with many that if they don’t get interested and do what God wants when they are young they don’t ever get around to doing it.  We must all seize the opportunity now.  As far as having doubts clarified, the teachings of the Church we quote and upon which we base our positions speak for themselves.  The traditional dogmatic teachings of the Church admit of no doubt.

Is MHFM part of the “Old Catholics” (Union of Utrecht)? No.

September 1, 2006


I enjoyed your visit with George on C2C the other night. I agree with a lot of what you said. Is your Order part of the Roman Catholic Church or what is know as the Old Catholic Church which was once the See of Utrich?




No, of course we’re not part of the “Old Catholic” sect.  The “Old Catholics” reject Papal Infallibility and the dogmatic decrees of Vatican I.  They are unfortunately heretics and schismatics.  We are Catholics and therefore accept the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, Vatican I, and all the true popes and dogmatic teachings of true popes throughout history.  (more…)

Are the Thuc Line Bishops Valid?

August 31, 2006

Brother Dimond: Thank you for being on the program Coast to Coast am. You are steadfast in your defense of the true catholic church. I am currently attending a Triditine Mass at a church in Orlando whose priest is ordained by a "Thuc Line Bishop". Do you consider the 'Thuc line' ordinations valid? Am I attending a legitimate Mass? Prayerfully awaiting your reply. Jack Bryant, Orlando, Florida.


Yes, the Thuc line is valid. The priests ordained in the traditional rite of ordination by Thuc bishops must be considered validly ordained. There are no legitimate grounds upon which to question the validity. However, since almost all of even the traditionalist priests hold some views not consistent with Catholic teaching – such as that non-Catholics can be saved, etc. – you almost certainly cannot support the priest, though you could receive the sacraments from him without supporting him, provided he is not imposing or notorious about his heresy. ------------- Fall 2004

Your points are well taken.  Thanks for your helpful independent views.  Re my question about the validity of Abp Thuc consecrations:  What is your informed view?  Is Bishop [x] validly consecrated since he is in succession from Abp Thuc?  Thanks for your refreshing insights!  -Paul M.
Paul, despite the claims of some “traditionalists,” especially the SSPV supporters, the fact is that the validity of the Thuc-line cannot be questioned.  If it can be questioned, then any Episcopal Consecration or Ordination performed in the Traditional Rite can be questioned.  We certainly have no bias in this matter, since we have no affiliation with the Thuc-line whatsoever.  The facts are the facts.  The Ordinations and Consecrations performed in the Traditional Rite by Archbishop Thuc and those whom he Consecrated must be considered valid, because when the Traditional Rite is observed the intention is presumed valid, as Pope Leo XIII says in Apostolicae Curae.  Further, there is no evidence that Bishop Thuc did not possess his mental faculties at the time of these Consecrations, even if some of his decisions were wacky.  We know someone who knew and spent time with Bishop Thuc in New York just before his death, and he said that he was very lucid.

Which Tan Books are NOT Recommended?

August 30, 2006

I was reading your web site, and read that you recommended the St. Louis De Montfort on the Rosary from Tan Books.  However, you stated that you dont recommend many of the Tan books.  Do you have a list of the books that should not be read from Tan?




They have much beneficial material; however, some of their books promote the heresy that souls can be saved without the Catholic Faith. This heretical idea was a big problem before Vatican II, as our material proves. As far as we know, Tan also sells a few books which promote the sinful birth control practice of NFP. But these are small in number, so it shouldn’t be a problem for strong Catholics who are convinced of the true positions.

“Where can I find a true church in London, England?”

August 29, 2006

Dear Brother Michael,

Please be so kind as to tell me where I might find a 'true' Catholic church in London, England. Currently I go to Westminster Cathedral, the seat of   Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor. Is he a heretic? Your site is very interesting. Many thanks,

RT Mulchrone


Thanks for the e-mail. “Cardinal” Cormac Murphy O’Connor is a heretic. He is a leader in the post-Vatican II sect. He publicly endorses the heresies of Vatican II, such as false ecumenism, etc. He also accepts the New Mass. He is a validly ordained priest (having been ordained in 1956), but cannot be considered a valid bishop (having been ordained in 1977, after Paul VI’s new rite was instituted), nor a Catholic one.  We don’t have the specific locations of Masses in England, but we have given you the e-mail address of someone who does know where the traditional Mass is offered in England. Using those guidelines, people have to apply them to their specific options. These guidelines include, of course, the fact that no one can go to the New Mass – but only a traditional Rite. No one can financially support any priest or “bishop” professing communion with Antipope Benedict XVI and the Vatican II sect. And one should not even attend the traditional rite of a priest or bishop who is notorious or imposing about his heretical position. But if there is a valid priest celebrating a traditional rite who is not notorious or imposing about his heretical position then we believe you may go (you don’t have to), without supporting him.

Can a Catholic attend a college or university?

August 28, 2006

Dear Brother Diamond,

First, thank you for speaking to the world about the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic family is relistening to a tape we made of Coast A.M. of your interview.  I hope you are invited back!!!!

I would like to know what you think of someone attending Fordham Univ. in N.Y.  My 22 year old son may be transferring there as a Sophomore.  I e-mailed him the link to the "Jesuit" pagan "sculpture" in Canada from your site.  Maybe he should read Fr. Malachi Martin's book "The Jesuits".  What do you think?  He does come to the traditional Mass at times, but not regularly, and does not receive the Sacraments!  Please pray for him.  His name is Jonah.    Thanks,

Janet Anderton


Thank you for your question. First, he shouldn’t bother reading Malachi Martin’s books. Malachi Martin mixed truth with error and misled many. He said that Buddhists could be saved without the Catholic Faith and that John Paul II never uttered a heresy. Second, our feelings about young men and women attending colleges and universities is this: normally speaking (there may be rare exceptions, of course) since the campuses of these colleges and universities are cesspools of iniquity – and living in the dorms surrounded by the pagans and non-Catholics who make mortal sin a way of life at such colleges and universities would be an almost-constant occasion of sin (with others constantly goading one to partake in such party-type activity) – it would be a tragic spiritual mistake for most young men and women to subject themselves to such a situation by living in the dorms at these colleges and universities.  Almost 100% of them would fail in such an environment and fall into mortal sin, no matter how much they protest that they wouldn’t. To preserve a person’s soul from such snares (and preserving the soul is the most important thing to be considered – Mt. 16:26), to attend such a college or university a person should either live at home and commute (that way he would be away from the mortally sinful party-lifestyle) or rent an apartment and live by himself so that he doesn’t have to live and constantly be around non-Catholics who are frequently committing mortal sins and/or encouraging him to do so (e.g. by inviting him to parties, etc.). “Catholic” Fordham University, since it’s Catholic in name only, would be considered just like any secular/pagan university. Hence, we believe one could attend provided that one doesn’t take religion classes or live amidst the sinful surroundings, but can be separate in some way by commuting or having one’s own place away from the others.

Which version of the Bible should I read?

August 22, 2006

Dear Brother Michael,

After hearing you on Coast to Coast a few nights ago, I have been compelled to re-think some things.  I have been struggling with my Catholic faith for most of my life. 1) Which version of the Bible do you consider the one to study and follow?



The Douay-Rheims bible is a good Catholic bible to have.  The Douay-Rheims with the Haydock Catholic Commentary is even better (it’s a big, red 3-volume set).  However, it’s not enough to just study the bible.  One must know the basic Catholic dogmas, and especially those which pertain to the current crisis.  As the bible teaches, there are many passages in Sacred Scripture which are hard to understand, and which people twist to their own damnation.  (more…)

Avoid the “Priestly” Fraternity of Saint Peter

August 15, 2006

Hello.   I live in a little tiny town within the Diocese of Phoenix. Several months ago, priests from the Order of St. Peter began coming and saying the Traditional Latin Mass at our little church that the former priest in the area closed.  What can you tell me about the Order of St. Peter?  Thank you.

Roberta Westcott  Clarkdale, AZ


Thanks for the e-mail. A Catholic cannot attend their Masses because their "bishops" are ordained in the invalid new rite of episcopal consecration. Thus, their "priests" are invalidly ordained. The FSSP also accepts the post-Vatican II apostasy, false ecumenism, the New Mass (even though they don't celebrate it themselves, they think people can go) and salvation outside the Church. Please watch our video on the New Mass online; the FSSP is mentioned in it.

From 2005

Brother Peter/Brother Micheal,

I recently convinced someone to stop attending the Novus Ordo Mass, and to attend the traditional Latin Mass. I sent him to a diocese church(St. Stephen the First Martyr) in Sacramento which is listed in the traditional mass booklet. I found out that recently the FSSP has taken over the Mass. They are a fairly new group so they do not have a lot of information about themselves on their website. Can you tell me if their Mass would be acceptable or not so I can let that person know?


Unfortunately the FSSP (Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter) is not acceptable for reception of Sacraments because the "Bishops" that ordain their men were made Bishops in Paul VI's invalid new rite of Episcopal Consecration.  So no one should attend their "Masses" because they cannot even be considered valid. They are also compromisers with the Vatican II sect. They accept Vatican II, false ecumenism and John Paul II.

“What do you think about Divine Mercy?”

Brother Diamond...just wanted to ask you a question...What do you think about Divine Mercy? I listened to you on the talk show the night that you were on...what an impression you left on me..some people don't like to hear what you said...but you told it like it is...

   I would appreciate a response as to what you think about Divine Mercy...E mail me back when you have time and thanks for your help...The real GOD BLESS!

                               Bobby Parkinson


Thanks for your question. We have received this question many times. We have a detailed answer to this question which we will be posting this week. Read full article here:

Sister Faustina’s Divine Mercy Devotion is something to avoid

“What is your take on this television network [EWTN]?”

August 4, 2006

Dear Bro. Dimond,

What is your take on this television network? Is there concern for my soul? I watch it but lately I sense no peace with viewing programs. I do not know what it is. Something is not there anymore. I am also interested in obtaing your offer made on Coast to Coast am.

Please advise. Thank you.


Terri, we have an article on EWTN on our website. In short, they accept the New Mass and the post-Vatican II religious indifferentism. Thus, while they certainly have a few good programs, they are very much part of the post-Vatican II apostasy. They accept salvation outside the Church, etc. They are not truly Catholic, but very heretical. You can obtain the $8.00 DVD special [Update: New Specials Here] by sending us a check or calling with a credit card, and we hope you do since it contains very important information.

A Marriage and Annulment Question

August 2, 2006

Hello Brother Dimond:

My husband and I heard you on Coast to Coast a couple of days ago and loved everything that you said.  We spent the entire day and evening yesterday watching the dvds on your website and reading the information there.  Everything you've said makes perfect sense to us and we both feel that you have come to us at a time in our lives when we were at a crossroads spiritually.

So here is our main question:  We have been married for five years and have a six year old daughter together.  My husband was born and raised a Catholic in the pre-Vatican II Church, and I converted to Catholicism from the Methodist Church after Vatican II.  We were both married previously in the Catholic Church and then divorced.  We married each other in a civil ceremony without obtaining annulments.  At the time, we did not think about the religious ramifications of what we were doing.  However, after listening to you (especially the dvd on Hell), we are now thinking quite a bit about it.  So the question is, what do we do now?  We obviously do not want to go to Hell.  Is an annulment still an option?  If so, what do we do in the meantime while we are waiting for the process to complete? 

…You and your fellow Brothers are in our prayers as you continue this wonderful work.  We look forward to your response.


Thank you for your e-mail.  It's great to hear about your interest, and God is definitely giving you graces to act upon this information.  We would encourage you to pray the Rosary each day if you are not doing so now.  Now to your important question.  If your husband was born and raised a Catholic and was previously married by a priest to another person baptized as a Catholic, then he was validly married to that person.  Thus, he wouldn't be free to marry again if that person is still alive (unless that person whom he married was already married, but we'll assume that's not the case). (more…)

“If the Mass isn't valid, what am I supposed to do?”

July 31, 2006

Brother Dimond,

I just listened to your show on Coast to Coast, and I couldn't agree with you more!  As a cradle Catholic, I've noticed some things about the Mass, and have begun to do some research into the Vatican that disturb me greatly.  For the past few years, I've had this feeling that my religion both, has been, and is currently, being compromised by human direction instead of God's.  And you summed up this "feeling" perfectly on the show tonight!!!  And for that, I commend you.

The only question I have for you is..................what is your advice for continuing to practice our faith correctly?  I'm most concerned with the Mass.  Is our Mass still valid?  I'm not old enough to remember Mass prior to Vatican II, but I've seen changes in it just in my lifetime that I don't agree with.  If it isn't valid, what am I supposed to do?

Sincerely in Christ,



Thanks for the e-mail.  The Third Commandment (Keep holy the Sabbath) is God’s law.  Attending Mass on Sunday and Holy Days is the Church’s law, which is only obligatory if the Church provides you with a true Mass and a truly Catholic priest within a reasonable distance.  There is no obligation to attend a false Mass; in fact, there is a positive obligation under pain of mortal sin to not attend the New Mass, since one cannot approach a doubtful or invalid sacrament. (more…)

Did Padre Pio ever say the New Mass?

July 25, 2006

Dear Brothers in Christ,
Can anyone tell me for a certainy, whether or not Padre Pio of Pietrelcino ever said the Novus Ordo Mass? Also, what date in 1968 was the Novus Ordo universally required of priests?...Padre Pio having died in September '68.Thank you for your reply,


Thank you for your question. Padre Pio died on September 23, 1968. The New Mass wasn’t promulgated until April 3, 1969. Padre Pio didn’t celebrate the New Mass. (more…)

What is the problem with the CMRI priests?

July 23, 2006

Dear Most Family Monastery,

I enjoy your articles on the Catholic faith.  I was born and raised in the v-2 catholic church.  One year ago my husband and I were blessed with suddenly understanding the truth of the true Catholic Church.  We attend Latin Mass in our area that has nothing to do with the V2 church.  However by the comments you have in your articles I sense some problem you must see with the CMRI order. Which is the traditional order that we have available to us in our area.  Can you inform me if there is a problem that I am not aware of.   The CMRI order have been so life giving and keep to the traditions of the Catholic Church.  I feel I am confused.  Please respond.

With you in prayer.

Nan Kopina


We know it can be somewhat overwhelming for people who are first discovering traditional Catholicism to then hear that the priests who introduced them to such truth – the traditional Mass, the rejection of Vatican II, etc. – are themselves denying aspects of the Faith.  It’s an unfortunate situation, but it’s true.  It’s part of the spiritual test that God has allowed this world to go through.  People must have a strong faith anchored to Him, the Church itself and her authoritative teachings, or else they will be swept away in desolation and confusion upon discovering that so many of those they thought were traditional are, in fact, heretical. (more…)

“Do I offend God if I stop going to the New Mass?” Answer: No.

July 17, 2006

Since it has only been about three (3) weeks since I found your Web Site I hadn't realized the utter catastrophy the Church is actually going through now. I can't find an Orthodox Church listed any where in this part of Alaska and so I haven't attended 'Mass' for the last two Sundays. This is my question though: There is a priest from Poland who sometimes comes to our Parish to say 'Mass' and when he is saying the words of consecration he uses the wording, "for many" , not, "for all". Am I allowed to attend his Novus Ordo Mass since he uses this wording? I am starving for for Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament, and I find myself quite often praying that I am doing the right thing by NOT going to the Novus Ordo Mass. Your reasoning is impeccable and I believe Dogmas are irrefutable, all of which leads me to believe me that Pope Pius XII was the last valid Pope. But I can't really free myself from the feeling that I may be offending God.


Thanks for the e-mail.  No, you definitely cannot go since the removal of “many” from the consecration is not the only problem.  The removal of “mysterium fidei” (the mystery of faith) also causes a doubt about the validity.  (more…)

Is a forced baptism valid? No.

July 11, 2006

Dear Brothers Dimond,

Your work compels me to say that You are truly worthy of Your respective names. Seen as a whole it is strikingly obvious that this work of yours bases itself on the unfailing Faith of Peter troughout the centuries and on the uncompromising zeal for God and His holy Truth of  St. Michael the Archangel. For the past two years Your writings have for me been a daily spiritual refreshment in this Hour of darkness that we are in. I want to be as brief as possible so I have one question for You. It has to do with the much mentioned Sess.6, Chap. 4 of the Council of Trent that the dogma deniers use in favor of the so called ''baptism of desire'' which You refute in Your book. In it You also give an answer why the Council mentions desire for baptism along with water being necessary for Justification. Can it be that with the mention of desire in that canon the Council also solemnly condemned the practise of forced baptism wich unfortunately did occur (although rarely). Maybe the question is off the mark or I have missed something that you have already written on but what does the Church say of such people who have recieved the Sacrament but against their will/desire. Is it considered valid. It would seem they are not justified although they recived the water of baptism.  Thank You in advance and may Our Lord bless You.

Vedran from Croatia


Thanks for the e-mail.  You are correct: a forced baptism would be invalid.  Desire is a necessary disposition for one above the age of reason to have in receiving baptism.

Catechism of the Council of Trent, On Baptism - Dispositions for Baptism, Tan Books, p. 180: "INTENTION - ... In the first place they must desire and intend to receive it…" 

Can one give Catholic burial to Non-Catholic parents?

June 1, 2006

Dear most holy family monastery

Thanks for being there.  pls kindly answer these questions that keep bothering me as a sedevacantist traditional catholic:

1.since catholics cannot commune with members of v2 or other heretics, what iam i to do at the burrial of my parents when they die before converting to the true faith but persisted in v2 church? how iam i supposed to pay my respect to them as  a responsible catholic child especially if the responsibility of their decent burrial falls on me?

2.i dont know what to do if a younger relation of mine staying with me should enjoy my financial sponsorship in school if he chooses to be a heretic even after taking considerable time to explain the true faith to him.should i send him away or continue to assist him finacially because of our blood relation?


Thanks for your questions.  1) If one’s parents die as rejecters of the Faith, then one cannot arrange a Catholic burial for them. One should arrange for them to have a simple burial, but without any ceremonies. 2) If one’s relative obstinately rejects the traditional Faith or any dogma, then one should not financially support his schooling.  If he’s over 18 then one should send him out of the home to be on his own.

‘Revelation’ to Mutter Vogel in the Pieta prayer booklet is False

May 22, 2006

Dear Brother Dimond,

        I don't know if you know about Mutter Vogel.  I just recently learned that he, or she (can't tell from the name) was someone who apparently in the early twentieth century received a revelation from Our Lord and He told her that we should not criticize priests no matter what they do or say.  Some traditionalists are using this to defend JP2 and B16.  They say we should not criticize them.  I know of at least two traditionalists who refer to it.  One of them uses it to defend JP2 and B16 and the other uses it to defend a certain heretical priest.  My argument against it is that how does one expect to do their duty to defend the Catholic faith if one does not criticize those who attack it?  Especially JP2 and B16!



Yes, we’ve read the alleged “revelation” about never criticizing a priest in the blue Pieta prayer booklet.  It’s utterly false.  Our Lord or Our Lady would never say such a thing; in fact, it’s exactly what the devil wants people to believe, and the perfect false doctrine to keep the unquestioning masses following the non-Catholic Novus Ordo “priests,” and mired in the darkness of the post-Vatican II apostasy.  The whole Tradition of the Church teaches that Catholics can, and sometimes must, rebuke or criticize priests. This is true today more than ever before.  The Pieta prayer booklet has some good things in it, but some definitely false things, such as this “revelation” to Mutter Vogel.  The booklet also asserts that John XXIII prayed the 15-decade Rosary each day, which we don’t believe for a second. It also contains the St. Bridget prayers, and lists many promises which it asserts are attached to the recitation of those prayers.  While these prayers contain nothing wrong in them, according to what we’ve read the promises have never been approved or confirmed.  Unfortunately, many people we know have diverted from the full Rosary to pray these rather lengthy St. Bridget prayers instead.  People should be aware that the extraordinary promises which the Pieta booklet says are given for the recitation of the St. Bridget prayers have never been approved or confirmed by the Church.

“Where does one go to seek a valid annulment?”

May 18, 2006

Dear Brothers,

Since an annulment granted by the Vatican II religion is invalid, where does one go to seek a valid annulment?  Thank you for your attention and God bless you.


Thanks for your question.  It’s important for people to remember that there is no such thing as “an annulment” of a consummated marriage, but only a declaration of nullity that a certain union never was a marriage to begin with if there is clear-cut evidence proving that a particular union was not validly contracted. 

Canon 1014, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “Marriage enjoys the favor of law; therefore in doubt the validity of marriage is to be upheld until the contrary is proven, with due regard for the prescription of Canon 1127.”
Since there is no Catholic who can issue such a judgment at this time, one could only apply the principles to an obviously invalid marriage.  In other words, if two people go through the motions and apparently contract a marriage it must be considered valid and binding unless it’s a clear and obvious case that it wasn’t a valid marriage (such as that one of the parties was already validly married to someone else).