Go Top
The Dimond Brothers
Catholics Against MhFM
Defending the Faith

The Crossroads at 23rd Street


"For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." (Romans 1:22)


"When FEAR knocks on your door, send FAITH to answer it."

The Dimond Brothers

There is nothing on the Most Holy Family Monastery website that gives any "real" substantive background information on either of the Dimond brothers. I believe that those who are considering to follow “anyone” and refer to them as their “Superior” have the moral responsibility and the right to first check into the background of the person or persons they will swear allegiance to and obey as if they are “God’s representative on Earth”. Making such a drastic decision without first studying the facts and then properly reflecting on the possible consequences of such an act is a “recipe for disaster”. Such naivety could well lead to complete alienation of a person from family and friends. It is not a decision that should be taken lightly. No one in their right mind would submit to such vulgar “bondage” and/or “psychological enslavement” without first considering all the consequences surrounding such an act.

Anyone ever wonder why the Dimond brothers haven't placed an auto-biography or a biography on the website describing what led them into this chosen vocation? You know things like their upbringing, their challenges associated with adolecense, their conversion into the Catholic faith, their association with Joseph Natale, etc?

Anyone ever wonder what the Dimond brothers actually look like? Oddly enough there are no pictures to be found of them on the internet except for those when they were in their 20s?

These two men are far too smart, far too shrewed and far too clever to have simply “overlooked” those points of interest mentioned above. It surely can't be imagined that it's because they wish to remain humble. Impossible! Anyone who has ever dealt directly with "Fred" or "Bob" know full well of their arrogant, condescending attitude and their “shoot from the hip” type of hotheadedness when they are cornered or confronted about something. Their false pride and treachery knows no bounds, has no limits. Of course, that is my formed opinion of them based on the information what I have discovered that is being presented to you, the reader.

Let's allow Father James Wathen (1932-2006) Explain:

They Call Themselves Brothers

I Know Mine and Mine Know Me: The Voice of a Faithful Catholic Priest to His Flock: Volume I
- by Father James Wathen (1932-2006)

"During his final bout with leukemia, the heroic priest, Father James Wathen, still kept up his pastoral duties by way of writing detailed sermons and transmitting them to his followers, since he was not able to perform his priestly duties for them in a physical way.

"We have collected these sermons, and have arranged them in book form to present them in a way that Catholics might enjoy. The sermons cover many subjects, and encompass over 600 pages between Volume 1 and Volume 2.

In this book you'll find a short section that Fr Wathen wrote in response to the outrageous, defamatory and pretentious remarks written by Robert “Peter” Dimond and placed on the MHFM website concerning Fr Wathens book “Who Shall Ascend”, labeling him an apostate and a heretic.

If you will take the time to look at the MHFM website "Heresies of Fr. James Wathen" you will read:

First of all, I want to state that we do this only because it is necessary, and because Fr. Wathen has demonstrated for years an obstinate rejection of the truths that will be discussed.  Various persons we know, including ourselves, have endeavored to charitably point out to Fr. Wathen where his position is mistaken regarding the Vatican II sect, yet he refuses to listen to the facts that are presented – year after year – and he continues to promote the same untenable ideas.

You will discover by reading "Heresies of Fr. James Wathen" on the MHFM website that Robert "Peter" Dimond attacks Fr Wathen on various points that the MHFM never believed in at the time when the monastery's founder (Joseph Natale) was alive. Before the death of Joseph Natale, in 1995, Fr Wathen was invided on numerous occasions to come to the "original" MHFM located in Berlin, New Jersy, and to lecture / speak on matters that Joseph Natale firmly believed in, supported and taught. Yet, after Joseph's death, Frederick "Michael" Dimond usurped control over the monastery and changed it's longterm position on certain matters of Catholic faith and doctrine. In an attempt to justify those "new" beliefs contradicted Joseph Natale's he set out to discredit Fr Wathen a heretic and an apostate. And why did he do so? Simply put, The Dimond brothers saw Fr Wathen as "the competition" within their "business of religion".

A Note About The Dimond Brothers (September 5, 2004 - Fr James Wathen)

Father James Wathen

I sent “Brother” Peter Dimond’s little piece containing his listing of my heretical opinions to a number of you. I was confident that everyone who might see it would regard it as a conversation piece for maybe ten, fifteen minutes, hardly more. It wouldn’t do any good to try and tell the young man anything, but usually individuals who assign themselves the task of critiquing everyone’s beliefs and theological positions are here today and gone tomorrow, carried away by arrogance and bitter zeal. A few observations about “Brother” Peter and “Brother” Michael might be helpful:

  1. They call themselves “Brothers”, but neither of them has made the standard novitiate, which the Code says is strictly necessary for professed religious. They call themselves “Brothers” because this lends prestige to their opinions.

  2. The two brothers do not pretend to live a monastic life. Their vocation, as they see it, demands that they busy themselves in controversy. They think that the Church is better served by their spending their time producing various kinds of works of theological criticism, than in prayer and contemplation, which is the traditional obligation of monks.

  3. Neither of the brothers has had the opportunity for normal catechetical instruction, let alone theological training. They imagine that this does not matter, and it does not to the uninstructed. To those of us who have “taken all the courses” their inadequacy is a glaring reality.

  4. Like all other “sedevacantists” they have an appalling hatred of Pope John Paul II, as if he alone were the main cause of the Church’s present malaise. He is not. The Church’s present condition is due to the Great Conspiracy, the World Revolution, about which we have been warned by popes of former times and by Christ, Our Lady, and other messengers from Heaven. This Conspiracy has filled the offices of the Church with its agents, all of whom are bent on converting it into the “religious“ arm of the One World Church.

  5. In order to get Pope John Paul out of his office, it is necessary, as they see it, to get him out of the Church. Any theological principle which prevents them from doing this must be ignored or denied, and anyone who does not see things their way is a “heretic”, a “schismatic”, or something of the sort. I did not see whether Brother Peter considers me in or outside the Church.

  6. The theological dogma which they find obstructive to their view of things is the indelible character of Baptism, which we are taught in the earliest years of our instruction. This indelible character signifies that he who has received it has been made an adoptive child of God, a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, and given a certain equality with Christ in the love of the Father (because he is a member of Christ). This adoption cannot be lost by any sin or renunciation; it remains for his eternal glory or shame. This is one of the chief lessons Our Lord taught us in the parable of the Prodigal Son.

  7. Certain texts of popes and saints seem to suggest that an individual can be expelled or can withdraw himself from the communion with the faithful. All baptized Catholics, whether they are clerics or lay people, can estrange themselves from God and Christ and their Holy Mother the Church by sin, including the sin of heresy (which is nothing more than a denial of doctrine), but they can never become “ex-Catholics”, so that they would lose the indelible mark of Baptism, and their status of adoptive children.

  8. I do not want to overlook the fact that there is nothing heretical in “Brother’s” list. It is surely not a heresy, nor an act of schism, to maintain that John Paul II is the true pope, even though a bad one, or to include his name in the Canon of the Mass. Neither is it heresy to sat the “Once a Catholic, always a Catholic”. I think sedevacantists are inclined to think that it is grave heresy to disagree with them.

  9. I have repeated often enough that as Catholics and as human beings we have both the right and the obligation to judge the opinions, positions, and ideas of everyone else. Our life in this world consists in making judgements about other people – whether they can be trusted, whether they are telling the truth, whether they will repay us if we lend to them, etc.; and to judge their opinions, whether they are true or false, right or wrong. As Catholics, we must always be wary of heresy from every quarter, including him who sits in the Chair of Peter, as he is not personally infallible.

  10. The law of the Church forbids us to pass judgement on the status of the reigning pope, whether he is the pope, whether we are bound to obey him in all religious matters that are not contrary to the Faith. I trust it is not necessary to repeat that the pope is infallible in his teaching office, not in his governing office. This is why we do not have to accept the New Mass, because its issuance is part of the governing office (even though there is no law establishing it as a liturgy of the Roman Rite).

  11. Keep in mind also that there is a very great difference between the pope’s or any other cleric’s propounding erroneous views, which Pope John Paul does all the time, and their endeavoring to impose such views upon us as a matter of doctrine and salvation. Pope John Paul has never commanded us to believe any of his heretical opinions under pain of sin. Sedevacantists cannot comprehend this simple truth.

  12. Sedevacantists also have the idea that anything a legitimate pope teaches becomes a part of the “Sacred Magisterium”. This is entirely wrong. Only those teaching that which are conformable to the body of teaching which has accumulated through the years from the days of the Apostles, whose teaching we refer to as the “Deposit of Faith”, is part of the magisterium. Anything that is a variance therewith is not.

  13. The two “Brothers” Dimond are two worrisome little men. Without any authorization and without proper theological training, they have endeavored to establish themselves as teachers of the faithful and ‘certifiers’ of all priests in this country. They make a lot of money with their misleading publications, tapes, etc., and they spend much time on the phone persuading people to stay away from the Masses of non-Sedevacantist priests. Who knows how many Catholics of good will have been persuaded to stay home for months on end -- even years -- rather than attend Mass, confess their sins, and receive Holy Communion? I urge everyone to give these men a wide berth; do not buy or circulate their materials, even those which are acceptable. Do not send them money. Beware of wolves in monk’s habits.

Richar Ibrayni (ex-MHFM) on the Most Holy Family Monastery (The Dimond Brothers)

Richard Ibranyi on the MHFM (Audio - July 21, 2011)
Download Audio Transcript  PDF

Richard had been an invited guest speaker at the Berlin, NJ, monastery during the time that Joseph Natale was alive; just like Father Nicholas Gruner, Father John O’Connor and Father James Wathen were invited as guest speakers. One of the major differences, besides the fact that Richard wasn’t an ordained priest, was that he solicited Joseph to become an MHFM initiate. But, for some unkown reason, Joseph did rejected Richard’s request. It wasn’t until after Joseph’s sudden demise, that Frederick, who managed to become the MHFM Superior by some trickery, granted Richard entry (April 4, 1996); feeling that Richard would be an asset. That “honeymoon period” didn’t last for long and on August 19, 1997 Frederick ordered Richard to leave. Joseph was right, Richard should have never been brought into the MHFM as he “sowed the seeds of Satan” into the hearts and minds of the others (sedevacantism), but never mind.

The important thing here is that for one year and five months Richard collaborated closely with Frederick and lived in the monastery’s facilities with the other lay brothers. The monastery was going through “hard times”, with the death of their founder, and in facing a lawsuit filed by Father William Ashley with the help of the New Jersey Catholic Diocese who sought to gain total control over the Berlin, NJ, monastery’s church and kick “Frederick and Co.” out.

During this period there were numerous questionable events that Richard witnessed and personally went through; which he recounts in the YouTube video on the right. Though the Dimond brothers have since branded Richard an apostate and a heretic (depending on what side of the traditionalist Catholic doctrinal fence you’re standing on), I would still seek to encourage you to listen to the video (audio recording) and familiarize yourself with his side of the sordid story describing in detail the lack of integrity that existed within the monastery during that time.

I would propose that if we are to believe anything else from Richard's audio, besides his claim that the MHFM is not and has never been a Benedictine monastery, it would be that Richard managed to convert Frederick's younger brother, Robert "Peter" Dimond, to "Sedevacantism" who then in turn convinced his older brother, "Frederick", to follow suit. Richard goes on to state that he believes that it is actually Robert "Peter" Dimond who is the strongest willed of the two brothers and is the "brains” of the organization; while Frederick is "just a Parrot". Of course, at this time, Richards claims are pure conjecture but worth considering.

Who is Frederick "Michael" Dimond?

All the relevant information concerning the most important person today in the Most Holy Family Monastery (Frederick), its Superior, is not easily found. The one paragraph of information that exists on the subject is contained on a webpage whose link is conveniently hidden in plain sight about halfway down the long list of haphazard links on the home page under "Our Monastery".

"Raised in a family with no religion, Bro. Michael Dimond converted to Catholicism at the age of 15. Brother Michael Dimond entered Most Holy Family Monastery in 1992 at the age of 19, a short time after graduating from high school. Brother Michael Dimond’s father graduated from Princeton University in New Jersey and his mother graduated from Stanford University in California. Brother Michael Dimond was elected superior of Most Holy Family Monastery in late 1995. Bro. Dimond took his final vows before a validly ordained priest".

So to start with let’s take a closer look at that paragraph above.

Raised in a family with no religion: Is this stating that his mother, Roberta G. Ralston (born March 25th 1940 in Kern, California) and his father, Frederick H. Dimond (born December 22nd 1940), did not practice their religion or that they were atheist? It is hard to imagine that neither parent was raised in a family where no religion was practiced. If his parents were not atheist then is Frederick ashamed of the religion his parents worshiped? It’s a question worth contemplating.

Bro. Michael Dimond converted to Catholicism at the age of 15: It would be interesting to know if Frederick initially converted to the Roman Catholic (Vatican II) Church or to a traditional Catholic group. It goes without saying that it would be extremely beneficial to understand the reason why he converted to Catholicism. Who and/or what influenced his decision?

Brother Michael Dimond entered Most Holy Family Monastery in 1992 at the age of 19, a short time after graduating from high school If Frederick joined the MHFM in 1992 and he was 19 then we can logically conclude that he was born in 1973. We can also derive from the sentence that he has a High School diploma but did not seek any higher level of formal education.

Brother Michael Dimond’s father graduated from Princeton University in New Jersey and his mother graduated from Stanford University in California: Hmmm … I wonder what Frederick’s father and mother studied at university? What were their majors / minors? What type of degree was obtained upon graduation? Knowing that would give some insight as to the quality and type of “home-life” the Dimond brothers had while growing up. It does seem to be important for the MHFM to state that Fred’s parents had university degrees at outstanding and expensive institutions. Is this inferring that the Dimond brothers came from a wealthy upper-class family or that both parents received scholarships?

Now is where it really gets interesting.

Brother Michael Dimond was elected superior of Most Holy Family Monastery in late 1995 Absolutely amazing, No! It seems that Frederick completed all the rigors associated with a Saint Benedictine apprenticeship required to become a monk plus, by osmosis, gained all the “hands on” experience of being a leader to become a valid Superior in only 3 years. What? How can that possibly be? In general, it takes 4+ years to become a “monk” in any other St Benedictine Monastery.

What types of monks are living / working at the Most Holy Family Monastery in Fillmore, NY? Though the website doesn’t give that precise information one would assume that they must be Cenobites, that is, the monastic, who live under a rule and an Abbot (Superior). There are also a number of Oblates that diligently work with the monks. Oblates are individuals (laypersons) normally living in general society, who, while not professed monks or nuns, have individually affiliated themselves with a monastic community. They make a formal, private promise (annually renewable or for life, depending on the monastery with which they are affiliated) to follow the Rule of the Order of Saint Benedict in their private life as closely as their individual circumstances and prior commitments permit.

What is the role of an Abbot (Superior)? What kind of man the Abbot ought to be?

“The Abbot who is worthy to be over a monastery, ought always to be mindful of what he is called, and make his works square with his name of Superior. For he is believed to hold the place of Christ in the monastery, when he is called by his name, according to the saying of the Apostle: "You have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry Abba (Father)" (Rom 8:15). Therefore, the Abbot should never teach, prescribe, or command (which God forbid) anything contrary to the laws of the Lord; but his commands and teaching should be instilled like a leaven of divine justice into the minds of his disciples.”
- The Holy Rule of St. Benedict

In order to be validly elected to the office of Abbot (Superior) what is required? If we look at the Constitutions and the Directory of the American-Cassinese Congregation of Benedictine Monasteries on page 14 you will find the answer.

Please note that it's at the St Vincent Archabbey that “Fred” claims Joseph Natale was trained at and received permission to “start his own Benedictine Community”. The St Vincent Archabbey is also the American-Cassinese Congregation.

In order to be validly elected to the office of abbot it is required that a monk be:

  1. at least thirty years of age; (Frederick was 22 years old)

  2. solemnly professed for at least seven years (CIC 623); (Frederick was a lay brother not an O.S.B.. And even if he had been allowed to profess he would have only been in the MHFM for 3 years)

  3. an ordained priest; (Frederick was never ordained a priest)

  4. a member of the Congregation. (no affiliation whatsoever with the Congregation but that’s understandable as Frederick is a sedevacantist or at least turned that way after stealing Richard Ibrayni’s work on the subject)

So as you can see from the above … Frederick “Michael” Dimond did NOT meet the "traditional" requirements to become a validly recognized Benedictine Superior. So one can assume that Frederick's MHFM simply created their own set of "Novus Ordo" rules (for lack of a better description) to support their specific needs.

Who elected Frederick “Michael” Dimond Superior and on what date? Joseph Natale, the founder of the MHFM, died on November 11, 1995. At the time of his death there is no official indication how many people residing at the MHFM had the right to vote / to elect a new Superior. One source informed me me that there wasn’t any election actually held at all. Another source tells me that there was only 2 people at the MHFM because John Vennari had left to go and work with Father Nicholas Gruner. That left Frederick (who wasn’t yet entitled to be called O.S.B. as he was still a layperson) and Thomas Wedekind O.S.B. (a mentally impaired individual who worked with Joseph Natale). There is no information to be found on the site that explains how and who elected Frederick. At any rate … Frederick became, by hook or crook, “Superior” and Thomas was soon after “ordered out” of the MHFM.

In short … it is not clear at all how Frederick became Superior. The question is relevant and needs following up on.

Bro. Dimond took his final vows before a validly ordained priest. Wait a minute … what vows? If it’s the vows associated with being “professed” to become a monk then the election that was held making "Fred" the MHFM's Superior is invalid isn't it? Referring back to the information I placed above you can see that a candidate must be professed for a minimum of 7 years before being eligible to be considered in an election for the role of Superior. “Fred” did NOT meet any of the requirements for becoming a candidate. So knowing that … what type of validly ordained priest would even listen to the “final vows” of a charlatan who had fraudulently presented himself as Superior? Who was this "validly ordained priest" that witnessed "Fred's" final vows? Why isn't his name mentioned along with his ecclesiastical credentials to give credence to “Fred’s” claim? You would think that the MHFM would be proud to present to their web visitors the authoritative “facts” surrounding the election in order to dispel any suspicion of possible fraud. This is too important to be taken at face value (i.e. Fred’s word). I believe I have provided enough evidence to speculate fraud and demand an accounting.

Father John Courtney Murray once said that “Anyone who really believes in God must set God, and the truth of God, above all other considerations". In short God will demand an accounting and in this case we have the right to demand one as well. Is "Fred" perpetuating a fraud against the public? You have the right to know.

Who is Robert "Peter" Dimond?

Outside of the fact that it is public information that Robert V. Dimond was born on August 9th 1978 in Philadelphia, PA; there is no other information found on the MHFM website concerning him at all except for the texts he has taken credit for writing.


I will continue to try and gather the missing data. But this should be enough for you to realize that something is not right with the situation here. The Dimonds are not who and what they say they are. They need to be continually asked to “fill in the blanks” until such time that there are no more blanks left to fill.


Faith is Liberty Espoused  •  © 2024  •  23rdStreet.com  •  Contact