CathInfo.com

Yes, the degrees of implicitness (of desire) have come to be a many steps removed.  Now ... I'll make a separate post on the difference between desire and intention later.

EXPLICIT:  I believe in what the Church teaches and want to be baptized.

IMPLICIT 1:  I believe in what the Church teaches and I want to become a Catholic (implicit that I want to be baptized).

IMPLICIT 2:  I believe in what the Church teaches and I want do do whatever God wants me to do (implicit that I want to become a Catholic which in turn is implicit that I want to be baptized).

THESE FIRST TWO involve explicit faith with an implicit desire to be baptized.  In the next level, we're moving onto implicit faith.  While some of the scholastic theologians (e.g. St. Alphonsus) speak of an implicit desire for Baptism, none of them support the notion of implicit faith.  When the BoDers quote people like St. Alphonsus on implicit BoD, his quotes actually apply to #1 and #2 above, but they pretend that they support the scenarios below (implicit faith)

IMPLICIT 3:  I want to believe in whatever God teaches (therefore implicitly believe what the Church teaches) and I want to do whatever God wants me to do (pointing back up to #2)

IMPLICIT 4:  I'm a nice guy trying to do my best, and that means that if I came to be persuaded of something as the truth, then I WOULD believe it, and I WOULD believe in the teachings of the Church and I WOULD do whatever God wants me to do (right up to Baptism).

So many BoDers have slid into Scenario #4, the salvation of the nice guy.  Really, since he's a nice guy, then he WOULD believe and do whatever he were persuaded of to be true and good.

Great points.  Also, the problem with Implicit #3 and #4 is that such desires/vows are non-specific.  Trent (and St Thomas and St Alphonsus) speak of a desire/vow FOR THE SACRAMENT, not just "what God wants".  If someone doesn't yet know that "God wants" = Catholicism/Baptism, then they can't have the proper desire/vow.  You can't desire what you don't know.
.
To answer this objection, these liberals then insert the argument for "ignorance" and that the person has "good will" because they want to do the "right thing".  Therefore, BOD in their eyes DOES apply to the IMPLICIT #3 and #4 due to "invincible ignorance" which Trent never speaks of, but the catechism does.
.
As Last Tradhican points out, the Modernists won the debate when they inserted error/confusion into the catechism.  If even Trent had utterly condemned BOD, the fact that it's mentioned in the catechism is enough for most people, who can't follow the theology enough to see the problems in all of this.

Yes, the degrees of implicitness (of desire) have come to be a many steps removed.  Now ... I'll make a separate post on the difference between desire and intention later.

EXPLICIT:  I believe in what the Church teaches and want to be baptized.

IMPLICIT 1:  I believe in what the Church teaches and I want to become a Catholic (implicit that I want to be baptized).

IMPLICIT 2:  I believe in what the Church teaches and I want do do whatever God wants me to do (implicit that I want to become a Catholic which in turn is implicit that I want to be baptized).

THESE FIRST TWO involve explicit faith with an implicit desire to be baptized.  In the next level, we're moving onto implicit faith.  While some of the scholastic theologians (e.g. St. Alphonsus) speak of an implicit desire for Baptism, none of them support the notion of implicit faith.  When the BoDers quote people like St. Alphonsus on implicit BoD, his quotes actually apply to #1 and #2 above, but they pretend that they support the scenarios below (implicit faith)

IMPLICIT 3:  I want to believe in whatever God teaches (therefore implicitly believe what the Church teaches) and I want to do whatever God wants me to do (pointing back up to #2)

IMPLICIT 4:  I'm a nice guy trying to do my best, and that means that if I came to be persuaded of something as the truth, then I WOULD believe it, and I WOULD believe in the teachings of the Church and I WOULD do whatever God wants me to do (right up to Baptism).

So many BoDers have slid into Scenario #4, the salvation of the nice guy.  Really, since he's a nice guy, then he WOULD believe and do whatever he were persuaded of to be true and good.

Hmmmmmm so would you see "implicit #1 and #2" as fallling under the same basic principle, while "implicit #3 and implicit #4" fall under the same basic principle?  That seems like what you're getting at here.

Yet, I'm inclined to accept "Implicit #3" as theoretically possible, but #4 seems not to be (though I realize some BOD advocates would take it that far.)