CathInfo.com

What is a BOD if not salvation via faith alone? Is it salvation via desire alone?

Many Modernists and those who have been liberalized/modernized in their catholic faith would believe that BOD applies to anyone who is "sincere" in their desire only (i.e. "Oh, wouldn't it be nice to go to heaven."  or  "I'm a good person, I love God, and I want to be saved....but I would never be a catholic.").
.
But as St Thomas and St Alphonsus (and Trent, and the Church Fathers, and many others) have said, BOD would only apply to a person who has taken actions.  1.  This would be studying the Faith by reading/talking/listening.  2.  Taking steps to come into the Church (i.e. taking classes).  3.  Most importantly, they must internally accept the Incarnation/Trinity and any other doctrines they have been taught.
.
Those that have done the ACTIONS above, could be qualified for BOD.  All others would not, because as Stubborn rightly points out, then that reduces BOD to a mere "wish" or "spiritual daydream" which is akin to the protestant's faith-alone heresy.

Like basically what I'm hearing from you guys is, 95% of the clergy accepted Arianism, but out of the 5% that specifically formed a movement to combat Arianism, 95% of *those* guys are also crypto Arians. 

We're not saying they are crypto Arians, but just still infected with some of Arianisms' false ideals.  Let's remember that Arianism was attacking the divinity of Christ, as well as the Trinity, both of which are spiritual mysteries beyond human comprehension, so just because someone accepts Church doctrine on the matter, doesn't mean they understand it enough to explain it in an orthodox manner (even if they think their understanding is orthodox).
.
EENS is more complex than those spiritual mysteries above, because it necessarily includes human emotion, because it deals with the salvation of loved ones, friends, and billions of people.  Not only that, EENS has been more attacked (directly and subtlely) than any other doctrine in history.  So there's LOTS of false notions, slighly-unorthodox points and outright lies about this doctrine that have seeped into modern times (especially since the Protestant revolt 500 yrs ago).
.

I don't know if you are a convert from Protestantism

I grew up Trad, by the grace of God.  Good for you for converting.
.

My point is, this doesn't disprove the extremely stringent position taken by Fr. Feeney and Fr. Wathen per se,

Fr Feeney and Fr Wathen (especially) aren't alone in their "stringent" position.  In every one of Fr Wathen's books where he speaks on the subject, 90% of the time he is quoting various other theologians/moralists from times past who are just as stringent on the subject. 
.
My experience is that Fr Feeney was not as research-oriented, nor voluminous in his writings, so his arguments were not as detailed.  But still, Fr Feeney's view on EENS is not new.  Go back and read the Church Fathers...
.

but this *isn't necessary* in order to be a stumbling block to Protestants and to Catholics who want to get along well with Protestants.  That one technically allows God to work extraordinarily in the life of someone who is invincibly ignorant doesn't really do away with the "scandal" in their minds.

I'm sorry, I don't follow the point you're trying to make.

Council of Trent Session 6 Chapter 4:

.....And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

As I said, "What Trent actually says, and this is infallible, is that justification cannot take place without it".