When it is said that Vatican Council II has not brought any thing new then there is a Feeneyite reading of Vatican Council II but if it is said that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), then this is a Cushingite reading of Vatican Council II. The Council has brought something new. It contradicts exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, with the use of a false premise.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are seen as objective exceptions to EENS and for example, the Catechism of Pope Pius X( 24 Q, 27Q)

 When it is said that Vatican Council II has not brought any thing new then there is a Feeneyite reading of Vatican Council II but if it is said that Vatican Council II contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS), then this is a Cushingite reading of Vatican Council II. The Council has brought something new. It contradicts exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, with the use of a false premise.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 are seen as objective exceptions to EENS and for example, the Catechism of Pope Pius X( 24 Q, 27Q). Since Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II with Cushingism he rejected the Council because of its non traditional conclusion.With Cushingism there had to be a non traditional conclusion. He did not knowof a rational choice which was available. The Bologna School of Alberto Melloni and the present two popes and those from Paul VI all interpreted Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingite reasoning.-Lionel Andrades