Dr.Robert Fastiggi uses the schism-card in a debate with Bishop Donald Sanborn without addressing the theological issues raised by the bishop.He does the same in comments.He writes 'Mr. Ferrara is refusing submission to the Roman Pontiff and communion with the members of the Church subject to him. This, though, is the very definition of schism found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2089 and the 1983 CIC canon 751.' 1
When I initially e-mailed him some time back on the salvation issue, he told me that he affirms the teachings of the present magisterium and he rejects what I say.But unlike Sanborn and Ferrara I am affirming Vatican Council II.This is a completely different ball game.I am also affirming Vatican Council II( premise) free in harmony with extra ecclesiam nulla salus(premise-free), to make things worse for Dr.Fastiggi.Like the two popes he cannot affirm Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) without the irrational premise i.e invisible people are visible in the present times.
I am also saying that Pope Francis is my pope even though he is in first class heresy and in schism with the past popes and so is in mortal sin and automatically excommunicated.It is the same with Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI.
For me Dr. Fastiggi is in schism with the past popes on EENS, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors, the past exclusivist ecclesiology, the ecumenism of return....
Tomorrow if the popes say that they will interpret all magisterial documents without the irrational premise, since they do not want to be dishonest,Dr. Fastiggi would have to do the same.Since for him affirming the truth and logic is not enough.It has to be magisterial too.
But the two popes have not done it yet.So at present he is in heresy; magisterial heresy and in schism with the magisterium of the past on the Nicene Creed, EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc.
But this is not important for him but that he support the present magisterium.
So at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit he will teach the students that all Jews and Muslims in Michigan do not need to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.Since generally unknown cases for us, of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are personally known to Fastiggi for them to be an exception to traditional EENS and the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
This is a false premise in logic.
It is irrational philosophical reasoning.
It is the basis of an irrational new theology being taught at Detroit.
It is a rupture with the pre-Pius XII magisterium of the Catholic Church.
It is first class heresy according to the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.
But it is magisterial!
The word magisterium refers to the teaching authority of the Church guided by the Holy Spirit.How can the Holy Spirit teach all this mentioned above.
How can there be a rupture with faith and reason with an innovation which says invisible people, now in Heaven, are visible exceptions on earth to EENS ? So all in Michigan do not need to be incorporated into the Church for salvation.
What if Bishops Donald Sanborn and Mark Pirvanus would say that they affirm invisible for us BOD,BOB and I.I ?.So there can only be an EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I not being an exception.And what if they announced that LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2,GS 22 etc also refer to invisible and unknown people in 2017-Michigan? Would they still be in schism for Dr.Fastiggi since this is not the magisterial teaching of the Church even though it is rational and tradtional?
In the Sanborn-Fastiggi debate on Ecclesiology the bishop clearly said that he would reject sedevacantism if someone showed him how Vatican Council II could be reconciled with the past ecclesiology. This can be seen on the Youtube video.
We now know that this is normal with Vatican Council II (premise-free).
But Fastiggi cannot recommend it to Bishop Sanborn- since it still is not magisterial!
For now Dr.Fastiggi and the present magisterium have chosen heresy and schism.
Dr.Fastiggi is limited by the magisterium. In the Ecclesiology debate Bishop Donald Sanborn spoke in terms of philosophy and theology. Fastiggi could not.
Bishop Sanborn bluntly said that in the past there was an ecumenism of return but now there isn't.Fastiggi had nothing to say.
How could he say that the present magisterium uses an irrational premise to reject the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church upon which depends the ecumenism of return and the Syllabus of Errors ? If he affirms an ecumenism of return and the Syllabus of Errors he would lose his teaching job at Detroit.He has a family to support.-Lionel Andrades