Guardian Angels have biblical basis, and AFAIK is something that can actually be said to be the 'unanimous and constant" teaching of Church Fathers

BOD is not doctrine. It was not taught by Our Lord, the Apostles, or unanimously by the Fathers, and has never been taught by a Council or by a Pope to the universal Church. It is an opinion, and one that I do believe will be condemned one day. There is still time
Have you read the actual doctrine I posted from Trent, Pope St. Leo the Great, Eugene IV and the Council of Florence? Please at least consider it..if you want, I can put it all in a single post for convenience.

This doesn't sound like a strong enough argument to discredit BoB and BoD, (or Guardian Angles). This is also just an opinion.

There are Scripture quotes to support BoD in the materials the other posters provided.

BoD is a part of BoW doctrine as covered in all the sources you provided. All of the positive things they (Councils, etc.) have to say about BoW apply to the other two, as long as the nuances listed in the material the other posters gave are observed. If BoD were going to be condemned, it would have been condemned by Trent since it was so focused on justification and the Sacraments. The Council Fathers and Church Fathers were in a better position to know than anyone since, that's why nobody has condemned it up to now. The Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him.

The only thing that can be condemned is the Modernist interpretation/opinion that aims for universal salvation by Bod. That will be condemned one day, unless you consider it already condemned by St. Pius X who condemned Modernism.

It is not called the Boston Heresy for nothing. Pope St Pius X teaches Baptism of Desire and Blood in his Catchesim:

16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.


"He that shall lose his life for Me, shall find it." (Matt. 10:39) affirms Baptism of Blood by Our Lord Himself.

The original catechism does not have these in it. It's an addition. Also it's called the Boston heresy because jews and freemasons like to lie and deceive people, that's why all the newspapers immediately all printed that the Church changed her teaching on EENS.

Emotionally minded people and people with weak logic are easily fooled by things like this.

This doesn't sound like a strong enough argument to discredit BoB and BoD, (or Guardian Angles). This is also just an opinion.

There are Scripture quotes to support BoD in the materials the other posters provided.

BoD is a part of BoW doctrine as covered in all the sources you provided. All of the positive things they (Councils, etc.) have to say about BoW apply to the other two, as long as the nuances listed in the material the other posters gave are observed. If BoD were going to be condemned, it would have been condemned by Trent since it was so focused on justification and the Sacraments. The Council Fathers and Church Fathers were in a better position to know than anyone since, that's why nobody has condemned it up to now. The Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him.
The only thing that can be condemned is the Modernist interpretation/opinion that aims for universal salvation by Bod. That will be condemned one day, unless you consider it already condemned by St. Pius X who condemned Modernism.

No the infallible statements made by the Church reject the very notion of both BoD and BoB, that means scripture does not teach it and any interpretation that does so is wrong and contrary to faith. You are ignoring the truth here, very few fathers believed in these errors, even St Gregory nαzιunsus who the Church titles 'theologian' outright rejected BoD.

It's clear you are here with bad will since you said "Feeneyite opinion is the novelty. That's why it's named after him."

You ignored all the evidence that was contrary to your false beliefs and once again falsely as attributed rejection of BoD as an invention of Fr Feeney. But clearly St Gregory denied it, so is St Gregory a feeneyite? Or are you going to call us Gregoryites?