CathInfo.com

What a false accusation. When I'm involved in a conversation, I patiently engage every objection made to me, even if I've already answered that precise objection 100 times before. You may not agree with me, but I did and I do. I just answered the objection Stubborn made, "To say they can obtain justification without them is to say justification is obtained by faith alone, which is what a BOD is", from two sources, showing that BOD is not justification by faith alone, but faith that works through charity. 

I had just answered that same objection in another thread, and had done so many times. BOD is not faith alone by any means as I showed. If you disagree with me, explain the sources. That BOD-deniers do not do that.

Speaking of not answering points, you did not answer many of the points I made in the OP. Why didn't Trent say "without the Priesthood, or without the desire thereof, the Mass cannot be offered" if "without the desire thereof" has no doctrinal implication here? It is only your opinion that the Grace of "Character Sacraments" cannot be obtained in Desire. Unction is not a Character Sacrament, but Trent says nothing about the desire of it.

I also gave examples you didn't address. I didn't say you couldn't disagree with St. Alphonsus, I said agreeing with St. Alphonsus was safe. What St. Alphonsus taught as de fide is not "objectively heretical" by any means. It may only be Catholic Doctrine (and thus only a mortal sin, but not heresy, to deny), but that's a minor point. It is safe to agree with St. Alphonsus, and I do.

If Trent meant to say "Both the Sacrament AND the Desire for it" were necessary, the Council would have done so. But it did not. Trent also associates the desire for the Sacrament of Baptism and Penance together in the context of the the Grace of Justification.

What next? Magisterial source on BOD? The Roman Catechism, which says Desire and Resolution, along with Contrition and Repentance for past sins, avails to Grace and Justice, so that the danger of being lost is not present. Also Baltimore Catechism which reiterates it.

Also the Condemnations of Michael Baius, in the sense they are understood in the Catholic Encyclopedia, that Love of God or Charity or Contrition avails the remission of sins both after and before Baptism, which is precisely the meaning of the Voto of the Sacraments obtaining the Grace of Justification in the Council of Trent. Trent explains that what it means by the Voto of Penance is Perfect Contrition. By associating the voto of Baptism together with the voto of penance, Trent also implicitly explains BOD is the same thing. If you doubt BOD's definition, you can consult St. Alphonsus' explanation of it.

You are the one of bad will, denying what the Doctors teach, to follow blind guides like the Dimonds. Do as you will. I don't care. I do care for your soul, but it is up to you in the end. I will pray for you.

I warn people not to embrace harmful errors that could endanger their Faith and ultimately their Soul. You can agree with me or not just as you choose. The point on Universal Acceptance is certain and has convinced many sedevacantists to leave sedevacantism. Read Salza's and Siscoe's book and the testimonies in response to it. 

Now you or others may or may not agree with it, and that is fine. I presume the good faith of those I talk to, and don't say those who disagree with me are of bad will just because they do.

Some people like you can't debate in a decent and dignified manner like a Christian gentleman but always resort to threats or insults or name-calling or slanders when you run out of arguments.

If you follow the Doctors, you are safe and will be saved. If you follow the Dimonds, you may lose your soul, and end up just like them.

All I know is that you're a schismatic, adhering to the SSPX, which is not in communion with the hierarchy, despite not having a single principled justification for why you can't instead adhere to a group like the FSSP.  If I had your theology, I would never think of supporting the SSPX or formally adhering to them.  I might go to one of their Masses when I had no alternative, but that would be s far as I could go in conscience.