Today afternoon I stumbled upon the 2004 video The Ecclesiology Debate:it is resolved that The Teaching of the Second Vatican Council II and the Post Conciliar Church about the Nature of the Catholic Church is HERETICAL. I was monitoring the ecclesiology links on the Internet.It is a debate between Bishop Robert Sanborn, Rector of the Most Holy Trinity (sedevacantist) Seminary, Florida and Prof. Robert Fastiggi, presently a professor of theology at the Sacred Heart Seminary, Detroit, USA.Both speakers do not define their terms on extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).There is an EENS which is Feeneyite and one which is Cushingite.Since there is a Cushingite EENS, which is an innovation, the conclusion is irrational and traditional.It is with this same Cushingite theology, the innovative theology, that Vatican Council II can be interpreted.So there is a Vatican Council II which is Cushingite and one which is Feeneyite. Neither of the two speakers made this distinction.
Both of them would at times refer to an EENS or a Vatican Council II which is Cushingite or Feeneyite, I could just watch the mix up,sadly.I could see through the mistake they are both making innocently.
(9:16) This new ecclesiology is alien to the Catholic Church-Bp.Donald Sanborn
The Cushingite ecclesiology is alien to the Catholic Church. He is correct here.However he did not specify it.
Vatican Council II is interpreted by me without the Cushing theology.The Council is then traditional and in harmony with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (Feeneyite).Without the Cushing theology we are back to the old ecclesiology, the exclusivist ecclesiology.I call it the Feeneyite theology.It is not alien to the Catholic Church.
Bishop Robert Sanborn and Dr.Robert Fastiggi are unaware of Cushing theology and irrational reasoning : at the centre of their debate is really extra ecclesiam nulla salus,the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus