XavierSem's response:
.
.
I will answer that, and it is easy to do so, but answer my question first, Last Tradhican. I addressed it to Ladislaus above and I'm asking you now.
Q. 1. "Let me ask those who may agree with the Dimonds on some matters one simple question: Let's say His Holiness Pope St. Pius was alive today. Let's also say you submitted a theological study, with some "Dubia" to him. H.H. reads it, then says, "No, my son, the Church truly teaches BOD. I did myself in my Catechism. And now, I as Vicar of Christ assure you of it"? Would you submit to his teaching? Or attack and condemn H.H. for it?"
As to Pope St. Siricius' decree, "Sicut sacram ergo paschalem reverentiam in nullo dicimus esse minuendam, ita infantibus qui necdum loqui poterunt per aetatem vel his, quibus in qualibet necessitate opus fuerit sacra unda baptismatis, omni volumus celeritate succurri, ne ad nostrarum perniciem tendat animarum, si negato desiderantibus fonte salutari exiens unusquisque de saeculo et regnum perdat et vitam." notice the Pontiff does not use the term "voto", which signifies a supernatural desire with contrition, but rather desiderantibus, which speaks of a mere natural desire. A mere natural desire, as everyone should know by now, as St. Thomas explains and even for that matter the Holy Office Letter mentions (when it says supernatural faith and supernatural charity are necessary for desire to be supernaturally efficacious) does not suffice to receive the Baptism of Desire. That should clear it up.
This is also a disciplinary decree, not a dogmatic definition. It also mentions infants. Even the New Catechism says every effort must be made to bring little children to Baptism, since only Baptism itself provides assurance that original sin is remitted and they go to heaven. Every effort must always be made to bring Baptism to adults, since adults also may not be able to attain contrition and thus have a purely natural desire for the Sacrament, which doesn't suffice.
This would satisfy most people, but I won't be surprised, Last Tradhican, if it doesn't satisfy you, and I subsequently hear "crickets" from you on this thread
Now, here's the Second Question, pertaining to BOD being de fide, because of the Pope and Bishops teaching it as divinely revealed in Church Catechisms.
Q.2. Church Catechisms approved by the Pope have not only taught BOD but presented it as divinely revealed. Now when something is taught by the Pope and the Bishops as divinely revealed, theologians say that is sufficient for the doctrine to be accepted as de fide. Do you want to see the quote of Fr. Tanqueray again saying this? I cited it in another thread and I believe even in this thread earlier. What some of you Dimond-disciples fail to understand is that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit not only in the first millenium but in the second also The divine assistance of the Holy Spirit promised to the Successors of St. Peter was not promised only in the 4th century, when Pope St. Siricius lived, or for some arbitrary time limit like 1000 years only, to cease to exist in the second millenium, when the Popes taught BOD, and in the 19th or 20th century, when Pope Leo XIII or Pope St. Pius X, lived. The Church has deemed the doctrine of Baptism of Desire safe to teach Her Faithful.
Your argument is ultimately not with us, but with the Catholic Church and Her Supreme Pontiffs itself. You believe the Church erred and contradicted dogma.
If She actually did do that, that would make Her a false religion, just like the others. False religions are false because they contradict dogma, as they all do.
So why the exception for the Catholic Church? If supposedly She taught heresies as dogma, then She's false also. But rather Dimondism alone is false.
And it has never actually happened that the Church has contradicted Her own dogma. Struthio essentially claimed all Popes who taught BOD are heretics.
See the absurdity and stupidity of the anti-BOD position. It leads to the belief that Popes, Saints and Doctors are Heretics and denies Church Indefectibility.