The Lefebvrists (SSPX) and Thucs(CMRI,MHFM) interpret the Baltimore Catechism with the  false premise. For Bishop Donald Sanborn(Lefebvrist) and Bishop Mark Pivarunas (Thuc) unknown cases of the baptism of desire are objective examples of salvation outside the Church. So they become exceptions  to EENS.Fantasy theology.

For Bishop Mark Pivarunas it is the same.Alleged objective and known cases of the baptism of desire are practical exceptions to EENS.So they both affirm EENS with exceptions.It is Cushingite EENS an innovation.

Then they come to Vatican Council II and interpret  Lumen Gentium 16 etc,  with the same error.They do not create a Vatican Council II Cushingite which they can accept just as they accept the false EENS, Cushingite.

They just reject Vatican Council II without identifying if they refer to Vatican Council II Feeneyite or Cushingite.

So the Voice of the Family on line Catechism Course based on the Baltimore Catechism is flawed since it is based on Cushingism.They have to acknowledge that the Baltimore Catechism can be interpreted with or without the false premise.So the conclusion would have to be different. It is the same with the other Catechisms.

The Voice of the Family course interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise; the false New Theology and so there is the hermemeutic of rupture with Tradition( Catechism of Pope Pius X, Catechism of the Council of Trent, the Athanasius Creed, the Nicene Creed( Feeneyite) ...). -Lionel Andrades