To Reply #63. What do you call this then, from the Catechism of His Holiness Pope St. Pius X? "A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire." https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/catechism-of-st-pius-x-1286

Go on, just declare His Holiness Pope St. Pius X an Invalid Heretical Modernist AntiPope, and be done with it! That'll show everyone.

Ladislaus, your position is reasonable. As distinguished from the Dimonds and what they claim, which even you regard as schismatic for the reason that it condemns Doctors like St. Alphonsus and St. Robert whom the Church has approved, I would say your view is almost acceptable. I could easily be convinced of it upon further study. Some early Church sources do suggest the OT just in limbo were baptized. I do not regard the Augustinian position of SBC today as being even slightly problematic. I see them as allies in the Faith.

God Bless.

And I in turn have no issues with this position you articulate here.  I have no problem with BoD when it’s not extended into Anonymous Catholicism.  I just have not been convinced that it exists.  Most of the Fathers rejected it.  St. Augustine was, by his own admission, just speculating.  And St. Ambrose distinguished between the washing of BoD and the crowning of the Sacrament.  Based on the paucity of Patristic witness to it, I see no evidence that this was revealed directly.  And I haven’t read any argument which proves that it derives necessarily from other revealed truth.  But I remain open, as Fr. Feeney did, to correction by the Church ... when we get a pope who is recognizable as orthodox.

BoB has much more support but there’s a lot of indication that the Fathers considered it an extraordinary form of the actual Sacrament rather than a substitute.

That's something that I, for one, can agree with. An extraordinary form of the sacrament rather than a substitute.

I’ll dig up the quotes that back this up.  St. Cyprian called it the Sacrament and a Manual of Church Dogma from the 5th century (long attributed to St. Augustine but certainly from someone within his circle) declares that there’s no salvation without the Sacrament of water except for martyrdom in which all the sacred elements (i.e. matter and form) are present.

An extraordinary form of the sacrament rather than a substitute.

Just as the God of Nature is not bound by His own laws to the extent that He cannot do as He pleases, occasionally setting them aside to perform a miracle, so He is not bound to limit Himself ONLY to the Sacraments He established to communicate the graces thereof.  It isn't really that difficult to comprehend, even if such occurrences are as rare as (or even rarer than) miracles related to the laws of nature.  Cannot receive the Holy Eucharist?  Make a spiritual communion.  Cannot confess when in a dire situation?  Make a perfect act of contrition.  Praying is as easy as breathing.  It strikes me as totally sensible that God would happily and eagerly meet any of His feeble creatures more than halfway in order to give them the graces they need. 

Just as the God of Nature is not bound by His own laws to the extent that He cannot do as He pleases, occasionally setting them aside to perform a miracle, so He is not bound to limit Himself ONLY to the Sacraments He established to communicate the graces thereof.  

God does not lie, when he says that it's not without water and the holy spirit.

Unless I am missing something, he was corrected.  Didn't take.
Just as one can receive a Sacrament yet fail to receive the grace thereof (due to improper dispositions), so can one receive the grace of certain Sacraments without receiving the Sacrament itself.  Does it happen often?  Dunno.  Don't care.  Not my business as it is infinitely above my pat grade.

 This is precisely what happens when one makes a spiritual communion.

You sound like a novus ordo.

Considering your profoundly insightful post about Schwab being -- GASP! -- a Jew, I am not too worried about your take on anything.
Spiritual communion is a completely traditional concept and practice, you ignorant, blind bastard.

Silly box.  C'est la vie.

Says the "man" who wears skirts.

"Spiritual communion" is totally novus ordo and designed to keep people in mortal sin while they make "spiritual communions" every Sunday as if that will save their souls.

Btw, a majority of people still don't know that Schwab is a jew. Don't project what you know onto others. You're not very wise, even if already informed about a particular issue.

Believe what you want.  Ignorant men of bad will are not worth my time.  Pax.