CathInfo.com

As I noted in the language of Trent itself, it says "in adults" there is a period of preparation before receipt of the sacrament, referring to the period of catechesis before baptism. There is, again, a distinction being made between adults and infants - as there is in the "other means" or "other remedy" language of the Catechism, Florence, and Pius XII - this time in terms of the administration of the sacrament.

You've convinced yourself that BOD is a phantom, that's all. 

Look, here's the bottom line for me. It's not a question of what I, you or anyone here thinks makes sense or what is right, but what God has determined to do. Has He determined to save men through water baptism alone since the promulgation of the Gospel, and determined that that is the sole way He will justify men and apply to them the Blood of Christ, without whom there is no redemption (Council of Trent, Session VI, Chapter 3)? John 3:5 can be read that way, and indeed some of the Fathers speak that way. As I have said, I was a former "Feeneyite" and am not adverse to that view (despite what some around here think).

But it is ridiculous to argue, for example, that the Catechism of Trent doesn't speak of a BOD and therefore lend the authoritative, interpretive voice of the Church to the meaning of Session VI, Chapter 4 of the Counsel. Even the Dimonds recognize that the Catechism speaks of BOD, but reject it on other grounds. In my view, it's simply not credible to argue that the Catechism doesn't express BOD - kudos for the Dimonds for not making that weak argument.

But to argue - as the Dimonds do - that the Council doesn't speak of BOD in light of the Catechism necessitates a rejection - which is radical - of what most "Feeneyites" don't reject - a view of the Magisterium and its "indefectibility" on pre-Vatican II terms, such as the impossibility of the Ecclessia Docens to teach serious theological errors in propagating the Catholic faith. Most "Feeneyites" want to have their cake (rejection of BOD) and eat that too (the "indefectibility" of a Magisterium that has taught BOD in its catechisms, etc.).

I say you can have one - rejection of BOD - but not the other (belief in the "indefectibility" of the universal teaching of the hierarchy on matters as essential to the Catholic faith as justification and the necessity of the actual receipt of the sacrament of baptism).

I'll entertain with you or anyone else (as a former Feeneyite) the rejection of BOD, but not the acceptance of an "indefectible" Magisterium as traditionally understood. To do so would be to embrace a contradiction, which is incompatible with truth - which is the necessary condition (in my view, and indeed the dictate of infallible and "indefectible" logic/reason) for holding any belief.

Maybe it's just me, but that's my issue. 

Happy Easter.

DR