Obviously this "necessity" can be met by desire for the sacrament, since Trent affirmatively states that with regard to Penance.
Right, and that's why I argued with the Dimondites on the other thread that BoD is not a heresy which denies the necessity of Baptism for salvation.
I'll write more later as I have some errands to run.
From the language itself, there are in fact two possible readings.
WITHOUT (SACRAMENT OR DESIRE)
WITHOUT SACRAMENT OR THE DESIRE (i.e. cannot without Sacrament and cannot without desire)
Even IF you read it the first way, as the proponents of BoD do, it's STILL a statement of necessary cause and not sufficient cause. AT BEST the sufficiency of DESIRE could be read as IMPLIED by the text.
I go with the second reading because of the context and the Scriptural quote that follows. I'll write more on that later.
Let's get back to the baseball analogy:
WITHOUT (BAT OR BALL)
WITHOUT BAT OR WITHOUT BALL (i.e. cannot without bat and cannot without ball)
... just look at the Scriptural passage following "as it is written". Trent is using "water AND the Holy Spirit" as proof text for "water OR the Holy Spirit"? That's preposterous to me.