This was the full quote I was trying to post, but it got cut-off for some reason:
Ladislaus-
“At the end of the day, prescinding even from who's right or wrong about the issue, the Baptism of Implicit Desire (BOID) crowd have the SAME "subsistit" ecclesiology as Vatican II, whereby the actual MEMBERS comprise the subsistent core, and yet there are those outside of this subsistent core who nevertheless belong to the Church. Consequently, we have separated brethren all over the world and in every religion ... separated materially but brethren formally. Consequently, since right intention has become the criterion for salvation, and clearly people have a right to please God and to save their souls, then they have the right to practice their religion ... even if they're in material error, because it's the new soteriology. This is why Dr. Fastiggi destroyed Bishop Sanborn in their debate, because he clearly showed that Vatican II ecclesiology was logically consistent with Bishop Sanborn's own stated principle that non-Catholics can be saved.
If you were to convince me that BOID is in fact Traditional Catholic teaching, then I would have to renounce Traditional Catholicism and accept Vatican II as substantially free from error. I would go join and Eastern Rite or FSSP or something like that because I personally find most implementations of the Novus Ordo Missae inconsistent with my own spirituality.
You guys reject the errors and heresies of Vatican II while yourselves holding THE VERY SAME ERRORS AND HERESIES. If your views are not heretical, then you are schismatic for separating yourself from Vatican II (which teaches the SAME thing that you yourselves hold).
So, LoT, SJB, and Ambrose, et al. you are NOT CATHOLICS. You are either schismatics of heretics or both.”