Is there an argument here? This is confusing.
Those who believe the dogma as it was once declared are Catholic. Those who do not are not Catholic and are the opponents of those who do believe it.
The dogma of EENS is in no way in conflict with Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood. Bishop George Hay, Orestes Brownson and Fr. Mueller teach Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood. They also believe EENS is a dogma without exceptions.
Membership in the church is gained through Sacramental water baptism. If someone hasn't received that then they are outside the Church. Baptism of blood and desire are not sacraments and don't incorporate a person into the Church.
So these two teachings do conflict with the dogma and those people you mentioned do NOT believe the dogma without exception; hence they do not believe in the dogma at all.
Show me a Catholic authority who teaches this. Please don't refer me to first sources (that you consistently misrepresent), but to an authority who teaches it the way you "understand" it.
Please clarify the question
What type of authority do you want to hear it from.
Anybody you want, just not first sources.
I'm not sure what you mean by first sources. If that's the Dogma itself then that should be all I need but here
St. Gregory nαzιanz, 381 AD: “Of those who fail to be baptized some are utterly animal and bestial, according to whether they are foolish or wicked. This, I think, they must add to their other sins, that they have no reverence for this gift, but regard it as any other gift, to be accepted if given them, or neglected if not given them. Others know and honor the gift; but they delay, some out of carelessness, some because of insatiable desire. Still others are not able to receive it, perhaps because of infancy, or some perfectly involuntary circuмstance which prevents them from receiving the gift, even if they desire it…
“If you were able to judge a man who intends to commit murder, solely by his intention and without any act of murder, then you could likewise reckon as baptized one who desired Baptism, without having received Baptism. But, since you cannot do the former, how can you do the latter? I cannot see it. If you prefer, we will put it like this: if in your opinion desire has equal power with actual Baptism, then make the same judgment in regard to glory. You will then be satisfied to long for glory, as if that longing itself were glory. Do you suffer any damage by not attaining the actual glory, as long as you have a desire for it?”
Topic: In Defense of Father Leonard Feeney (Read 8084 times)