CathInfo.com

Yeah, Caminus, go ahead and tell us that every obiter dictum in the Catechism of Trent constitutes an infallible dogmatic definition while at the same time saying that a legitimate Pope and Ecuмenical Council can promote error to the universal Church.

Asserting that a doctrine is taught by way of the universal ordinary magisterium is to necessarily posit that it has not been solemnly defined.  

I see your tactic to dismiss the doctrine is now to attempt to consign it to mere obiter dicta.  Fascinating.  Now maybe you can explain on what grounds you assert such a thing other than by force of your rabid prejudice?  

Regarding your futile charge that I must concede your arbitrary selectivity with regard to this doctrine because of the modernism within the hierarchy today, I would draw your attention to the fact that the evidence adduced above implies that without faithful diligence in carefully protecting and explaining sacred doctrine, disasterous effects could have ensued.  

There is simply no parity, no matter how much you wish, between a doctrine that is the object of the universal ordinary magisterium, doctrinal tradition as exposited by faithful and approved theologians, and that of the situation today.  I am not of the sedevacantist opinion that the bishops lose their free will with regard to faithfully discharging their duties.  Consequently, if they lust for novelty and fall into error, it is merely a moment in time all happening under the guise of authority.  Our point of reference in order to discern this modern spirit is precisely the traditional magisterium, the very thing you call into question by your denial of its rectitude.  It is not so much in the denial of the doctrine that merits for you the epithet 'heretic' (for it is not defined and thus you escape such a title) rather it is what you do to the divine constitution of the Church by mere implication.    

One wonders what recourse you would have if this crisis were not upon us.  Just like the revolutionary who is bent upon destablizing society for his own end, so too do you take advantage of this crisis in order to further your agenda.      

Someone was kind enough to send me the original Latin, and this passage in Trent represents yet another butchered translation (probably to further an agenda).

...qui rationis usu praediti sint, Baptismi suscipiendi propositum, atque consilium, & male actae vitae poenitentia satis futura sit ad gratiam, & iustitiam, si repentinus aliquis casus impediat, quominus salutari aqua ablui possint

There's nothing here whatsoever about "impossibility", as the Latin impediat means to hindred or obstruct.  It's actually rather bad Latin, but the sense is clear.  It should be translated as follows:

"[these proper dispositions] would suffice to see them through any sudden event/mishap that might get in the way of their being able to be cleansed/washed with the saving water", see them through "to grace and justice" -- I just put that last part last not to interrupt the flow.

In other words, it's saying basically that God would not let anything get in the way of their receiving the Sacrament of Baptism if they have the proper dispositions.

Someone was kind enough to send me the original Latin, and this passage in Trent represents yet another butchered translation (probably to further an agenda).

Quote

...qui rationis usu praediti sint, Baptismi suscipiendi propositum, atque consilium, & male actae vitae poenitentia satis futura sit ad gratiam, & iustitiam, si repentinus aliquis casus impediat, quominus salutari aqua ablui possint

There's nothing here whatsoever about "impossibility", as the Latin impediat means to hindred or obstruct.  It's actually rather bad Latin, but the sense is clear.  It should be translated as follows:

"[these proper dispositions] would suffice to see them through any sudden event/mishap that might get in the way of their being able to be cleansed/washed with the saving water", see them through "to grace and justice" -- I just put that last part last not to interrupt the flow.

In other words, it's saying basically that God would not let anything get in the way of their receiving the Sacrament of Baptism if they have the proper dispositions.

This totally makes rational sense, and it's what I've thought since I heard the entire BoD argument.