CathInfo.com

And yet, both you and MirariV (and St Augustine, and St Ambrose, and St Thomas, and everyone else i've ever talked to) provide different definitions of BOD.
.
Trent mentions it in 1 sentence and that's a "teaching"?  hahahaha.

Right, and Father Cekada's survey actually proves the opposite.  Really, the best way to infer which of the theologians in his list believe Trent taught BoD was to find the ones who assigned a higher theological note to BoD than to BoB.  In fact, Patristic evidence for the latter is much stronger.  So the only way to explain this is to suppose they believed that Trent had taught it.

I found NINE of the 25 who did that.  I believe about 3-4 (if I recall) assigned a LOWER theological note to BoD than to BoB.

And if Trent had taught it, then EVERY SINGLE ONE of those 25 would have to hold that it as at least theologically certain.

So the evidence suggests that only about 1/3 of these theologians believed that BoD was taught by Trent, while 2/3 did not.

We have the BoDers arguing desperately, tooth-and-nail, to salve St. Ambrose and St. Augustine in favor of BoD.  Why?  It's because that's ALL they've got in terms of Patristic "evidence."  Meanwhile, anti-BoDers have 5 or 6 Fathers.  Even if we were to concede that St. Ambrose believed it ... and that St. Augustine did for a time, that's not fatal to the anti-BoD case at all, since all that has to be demonstrated is the lack of "dogmatic consensus" on the Church Fathers.  Having 2 in favor and 5 against can hardly be said to constituted dogmatic consensus in favor.

Most of the time, in fact, I have tacitly conceded the St. Ambrose one, saying that AT MOST they have 1.5 Fathers who favor BoD.

I guess there is no point of debating this, nothing will change your mind. I’m very confident and comfortable following ALL of the Popes, ALL of the bishops, and ALL of the theologians post Trent. I hope it’s not pride that motivates you and the others who hold your position and I suggest you all do some serious introspection.

It really does seem to be pride. Just look at how every authoritative Catholic source, including the Catholic Encyclopedia, understood the condemnations of Baius, before the "enlightened" Dimonds came forward to correct all the Popes, Saints, Doctors and Theologians. [By the way, anyone knows who wrote "De Rebaptismate mentioned in the CE? There's a Fifth Ancient Source right there]

From: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm

"The baptism of desire

The baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis) is a perfect contrition of heart, and every act of perfect charity or pure love of God which contains, at least implicitly, a desire (votum) of baptism. The Latin word flamen is used because Flamen is a name for the Holy Ghost, Whose special office it is to move the heart to love God and to conceive penitence for sin. The "baptism of the Holy Ghost" is a term employed in the third century by the αnσnymσus author of the book "De Rebaptismate". The efficacy of this baptism of desire to supply the place of the baptism of water, as to its principal effect, is proved from the words of Christ. After He had declared the necessity of baptism (John 3), He promised justifying grace for acts of charity or perfect contrition (John 14): "He that loveth Me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him and will manifest myself to him." And again: "If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him." Since these texts declare that justifying grace is bestowed on account of acts of perfect charity or contrition, it is evident that these acts supply the place of baptism as to its principal effect, the remission of sins. This doctrine is set forth clearly by the Council of Trent. In the fourteenth session (cap. iv) the council teaches that contrition is sometimes perfected by charity, and reconciles man to God, before the Sacrament of Penance is received. In the fourth chapter of the sixth session, in speaking of the necessity of baptism, it says that men can not obtain original justice "except by the washing of regeneration or its desire" (voto). The same doctrine is taught by Pope Innocent III (cap. Debitum, iv, De Bapt.), and the contrary propositions are condemned by Popes Pius V and Gregory XII, in proscribing the 31st and 33rd propositions of Baius."

Let no one say the Catholic Encyclopedia doesn't define what Trent means by Baptism of Desire either, because it clearly does above.